Wordtrade.com

Judaism

Review Essays of Academic, Professional &
Technical Books in the Humanities &
Sciences

Jews in Italy

Rabbi Judah Moscato and the Jewish Intellectual World of Mantua in
the 16th-17th Centuries by Giuseppe Veltri and Gianfranco
Miletto (Studies in Jewish History and Culture: Brill
Academic) Judah ben Joseph Moscato (c.1533-1590) was one of the most
distinguished rabbis, authors, and preachers of the Italian-Jewish
Renaissance. This volume is a record of the proceedings of an
international conference, organized by the Institute of Jewish
Studies at Halle-Wittenberg (Germany), and Mantua's State Archives.
It consists of contributions on Moscato and the intellectual world
in Mantua during the 16th and 17th centuries.

Giuseppe Veltri, is Professor of Jewish Studies at the University
of Halle-Wittenberg and Director of the Zunz Centre (Halle). He has
published widely in the subjects of hermeneutics and philosophy
including Gegenwart der Tradition (2002), Cultural Intermediaries
(2004 with D. Ruderman); Libraries, Translation and 'Canonic texts'
(2006); The Jewish Body (2008, with M. Diemling); Renaissance
Philosophy in Jewish Garb (2009); Judah Moscato's Sermons (2011).

Gianfranco Miletto is university private lecturer
("Privatdozent") at the University of Halle-Wittenberg. He has
published on Biblical Philology and on the Jewish culture in Italy
at the time of the Renaissance and Counter-Reformation: L' Antico
Testamento Ebraico nella tradizione babilonese (1992); Die
Heldenschilde des Abraham ben David Portaleone, 2 vols. (2003);
Glauben und Wissen im Zeitalter der Reformation (2004); Judah
Moscato's Sermons (2011).

Excerpt: Judah Moscato is a typical example of the Jewish intellectual who
was influenced by the Italian Renaissance world. Confronted by the
challenges of the new philosophical and humanistic knowledge, he did
not reject it; rather, he strove to mediate between the secular
culture and Jewish tradition. Even Moscato's opponents recognized
his extensive knowledge and the quality of his cultural and moral
leadership of the Jewish Mantuan community. Because of the forced
conversion of some Mantuan Jews, Moscato was imprisoned and
subjected to intense psychological pressure in order to obtain his
conversion as well. Yet the Carmelite fathers who argued with him
for many days were finally forced to resign. They considered him "to
be such a sagacious man that he alone could sustain the whole
Synagogue and disturb all the Jews who intend to come to our faith."
As homo universalis, he combined in unique manner Jewish and
Christian ideas, conceptions, and intellectual as well as
scientific achievements: he was interested in natural science and
Kabbalah and bridged the gap between Jewish tradition and the
secular world.

However, Moscato is not an exception. During the Renaissance
period, Mantua was one of the most important, prosperous, and lively
centers of Jewish culture. Eminent and influential scholars such as
Azariah de' Rossi, Moshe and Abraham Provenzali, Abraham Colorni,
Joseph Colon, Mordecai Finzi, and Salomone de' Rossi lived and worked in Mantua. The importance of Mantua as a city of literacy,
printed materials, and publishing houses was exceeded at that time
only by Venice. So, for instance, the Nofet Sufim by Judah Messer
Leon (1474/76) and the first edition of the Zohar (1558-60) were
produced by the Mantua printing house of Abraham Conat. In this
stimulating cultural environment, Moscato could develop his literary
creativity.

Besides his two printed major works, the ample commentary on
Judah Halevi's Sefer ha-Kuzari, called Qol Tehudah, "The voice of
Yehudah", and the sermon collection Nefusot Yehudah ("The Dispersed
of Judah"), Judah Moscato was the author of several responsa,
sonnets, and liturgical poems that are still unpublished. His
writings display his profound moral commitment and reveal his
eclectic scholarship and wide knowledge of rabbinical and classical
authors. Especially in the history of Jewish preaching, Judah
Moscato occupies a unique position and he can be regarded "as the
father of the modern Jewish Sermon." His Sermons clearly reveal and
in a sense anticipate a Baroque taste for the dialectic method of
Jewish exegesis. Moscato raised Jewish homiletics to a new
rhetorical level. He treated theological and philosophical subjects
with elaborate metaphorical concepts that make his language
fascinating, yet at the same time also difficult even for a Baroque
reader. In a letter to his teacher, R. Samuel Archivolti, Leone
Modena compared the style of his own sermons with those of Moscato:
"The sermon [i.e., Modena's] is amplified through associations made
in accordance with the art of rhetoric. I have not seen any printed
sermons that follow this path. The language also is intermediate
between the language of [ Judah] Moscato, of blessed memory, which
is so highly polished and stylized that many do not like it, and the
language of most of the Levantine and Ashkenazic rabbis, which is
much simpler."

Particularly in his sermons, Moscato expressed his moral commitment not only to inquiry and truth, but also to teaching them
to others. As a preacher, Moscato performed a mediating function
between tradition and innovation, mixing and combining every source
of his sermons, from the rabbinic to classical and contemporary
authors, from Neoplatonic philosophy to the kabbalistic tradition.'
His main purpose was to teach and educate, giving aesthetic pleasure
to his listeners in melodious tune with the Horatian principle of
utility (prodesse)and delight (delectare).

Despite his fame, Moscato's life and writings have been little
investigated. Leopold Zunz's Die gottesdienstlichen Vortreige der
juden historisch entwickelt initiated scientific inquiry into Jewish
homiletics and the rediscovery of Moscato's sermons. After Zunz's
pioneering work, Israel Bettan, Marc Saperstein, and Moshe Idel
dedicated some studies to Judah Moscato.' Alexander Altmann pointed
out the importance of rhetoric in Moscato's works,' and recently
Adam Shear has fitted Moscato into the humanistic context of the
Italian Renaissance.' However, a detailed monograph about Moscato
and the cultural back-ground that inspired his work has yet to be
published. The only spe-cific bio-bibliographical study about
Moscato remains the monograph published in 1900 by Abe Apfelbaum."

The present volume does not purport to correct this deficiency.
It attempts only to highlight some salient features of Moscato's
works and life within the social and cultural context of Mantua in
the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries. This is all the more
necessary because since Shlomo Simonsohn's Histog of the Jews in the Duchy of Mantua, no
other study focused on the Jews of Mantua has appeared.

This volume is a record of the proceedings of an international
conference, organized by the Institute of Jewish Studies at
Halle-Wittenberg (Germany), where the project "Culture transfer in a
new style: The Renaissance preacher, Judah Moscato (1533-1590)" is
financed by the German Research Foundation (Bonn) and Mantua's State
Archives. It took place in Mantua, Judah Moscato's hometown, in July
2009 and was financially supported by the Thyssen-Foundation
(Cologne). The book is divided into two parts. The first is
dedicated to the protagonist himself, his work and life; the second
aims at a broader view and deals with the historical and cultural
context of Renaissance Judaism.

In the first paper, Gianfranco Miletto presents some new
documents recently discovered in the State Archives of Mantua. They
not only contain important biographical information about Moscato
himself, his family, and his environment, but also testify to
Moscato's moral qualities. The reports that the castellano of
Mantua, Luigi Olivo, sent daily to the duke's secretary during the
imprisonment of Moscato show his firm character as a moral and
religious leader who would rather die than deny his religion and his
ethical principles. The correspondence of the duke's officials
permits us to better understand the changed relationship between
Jews and Christians at the time of the Counter-Reformation and sheds
needed light on Duke Guglielmo's policies toward the Jews.

Giuseppe Veltri focuses on an important issue of Renaissance
philosophical history in which Moscato was involved: skeptical
thought. He offers a wide introduction to the Jewish tradition of
skepticism from the Middle Ages to modem times and gives an
extensive comparison of the conceptions of Judah Moscato and his
later colleague in the nearby city of Venice, Rabbi Simone Luzzatto.
In his sermon XVI, Moscato doubted the validity of the human
sciences, preferring to combine science with the study of the Torah.
Moscato belittled the importance of the sciences, but did not
totally reject them. The main sin of the sciences is—according to
the preacher--not to search for agreement with the Torah, although
their claim is very similar to that of religion, but to attain the
perfection of God.

A special genre of Moscato's sermons that has been hitherto
mostly ignored is the eulogies he delivered at funerals. Marc
Saperstein illustrates Moscato's exegetical method, examining the
bibliographical information on the deceased and the rhetorical
arrangement of the speech itself. Saperstein raises in particular
the difficult question of the relationship between the rhetorical
devices used in the printed Hebrew text and those in the eulogy as
delivered in Italian. Saperstein's analy-sis points up Moscato's
sincere emotions in the face of the loss through death of a great
scholar, which remain apparent despite his substantial display of
erudition and rhetorical emphasis.

One of the two major works of Moscato is the Qol Yehudah, a commentary on Judah Halevi's Sefer ha-Kuzari. Moshe Idel
investigates the question as to why this particular book excited the
interest of Moscato. It is very plausible that Moscato was attracted
by the Platonic and esoteric features of Halevi's book, which fits
well into Moscato's philosophical spirituality. Idel describes the
function of the Kabbalah in Qol Yehudah and traces Moscato's
intellectual development. The Rabbi was, according to Idel, much
more interested in Kabbalah in his later work, but always maintained
a philosophical approach to his kabbal-istic vision. As is the case
with Azariah de' Rossi and Leone Mod-ena, much less evident in
Moscato's commentary are the mythological aspects emanating from the
Spanish Kabbalah, the Zoharic literature, and the unparalleled
renascence of 16th-century Kabbalah in Safed. Moscato's kabbalistic
conception was influenced by the Renaissance theory of prisca
theologia, according to which there is more than one source of
revelation—a vision that differs from the unilinear theory of prisca
theologia that was en vogue among the Jews at the time. On this
point, Moscato is much closer to Marsilio Ficino than to any other
Jewish thinker.

Bernard Cooperman offers a study on Amicitia and Hermeticism as a
paratext of Moscato's sermons. Moscato, who perfected the form of
the Jewish sermon, transfigured its substance, and raised it to the
level of a distinct literary art, also often quoted classical
philosophers and included their thoughts in his sermons. Any sense
of alienness produced by Moscato's references to Seneca and
Aristotle would, Cooper-man suspects, have been assuaged by his
clever biblical paraphrases. Moscato himself obviously saw the
ancient traditions of Roman and hermetic wisdom as actually implicit
in the Torah.

Comparing Moscato's sermons with Portaleone's encyclopedic
description of Solomon's Temple, Andrew Berns describes the intense
interest in natural philosophical topics in the Italian Jewish
culture in the sixteenth century. The integration of modern natural
philosophical knowledge into homiletic and religious works proves
the intensity of the exchange between Italian Jewry and Renaissance
culture. A good illustration of this can be seen in Leone de'
Sommi's translation of the Psalms into Italian. De' Sommi tried to
combine the lexical character of the Hebrew text with the Italian
poetic tradition (see also below, on the contribution of Alessandro
Guetta).

The Christian and Jewish sources in Qol Yehudah are very useful
for understanding the cultural background of Moscato. Adam Shear's
examination of Moscato's sources reveals a mixed environment in
which printed books and manuscripts co-exist, especially for
scholars, although non-elite book owners were definitely turning to
the printed book in this era. As a member of a learned elite who was
writing for his peers, Moscato did not stop—according to Shear—using
manu-scripts or works only available in manuscript.

In the second part of the book, dedicated to Moscato's world of
Renaissance Judaism, Daniela Ferrari reveals hidden treasures in the
Gonzaga archives of Mantua, which are crucial for research into
Jew-ish Studies. The archives produced by the Gonzagas, rulers of
Mantua from 1328 to 1707, are one of the most complete and
homogeneous collections on dynastic ruling families in Europe in the
Early Modern period.

Don Harrán presents the history of the Levi dall'Arpa family, a
gen-eration of Mantuan musicians well known outside the borders of
the duchy. Daniel Levi dall'Arpa, for example, also worked for many
years at the court of the Habsburgs in Vienna. But recognition as an
artist did not always protect Jews in Mantua from persecution:
Abramino dall'Arpa was forced to become a Christian, and Moscato was
also involved in this forced conversion and imprisoned.

The social relationships between Jews and Christians are explored
by Dana Katz on the basis of the image of the Jew in Christian art,
especially the image of the Norsa Madonna in Santa Maria della
Vittoria. She proves that those relations were not delineated as
clearly as is often presented, and, in fact, changed quite often.
According to Katz, the cartographic map of Mantua constitutes space
as a topographical order of things that set down architectural
borders within the broad domain of the countryside. Yet the Norsa
Madonna reveals the alterity—the quality of "the other"—hidden
within those borders and the complex consequences of its
appropriated spaces.

The Jews of Mantua were not a uniform community. Claudia
Rosen-zweig examines the cultural transfer from Germany to Italy.
Mantua, home to one big and active Ashkenazi community, was a center
for Yiddish culture in northern Italy. Here, thanks to contact with
the Italian Renaissance, new literary genres were created. They had
an influence on Yiddish literature until the twentieth century. Some
of those texts were even written in Germany and brought to Italy.

The international importance of the Jewish community in Mantua is
emphasized in Daniel Jütte's paper. He demonstrates the European
connection on the basis of Abramo Colorni's (1544-1599) life and
Maggino Gabrielli's trading company. As a court alchemist, Colorni
was one of the main characters in the cultural transfer from Italy
to Baden-Württemberg and Prague.

The meaning of magic, mysticism, and Kabbalah in the Italian
culture of the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries is a central
topic of the paper delivered by Saverio Campanini. His lecture about
the first printing of Sefer Yesirah (Mantua 1562) and its reception
among Christian scholars also illustrates the frequent tensions in
the relationship between Jews and Christians in Mantua.

Alessandro Guetta emphasizes a further aspect of Italian life in
the Renaissance, namely translation, focusing on the Italian
translation of the Psalms by Judah Sommo and its impact on the
transfer of Jewish-Italian culture and discourse. He proves that
the contribution of Jewish translators to the history of Italian
literature and to the shaping of the Italian language was of
incontrovertible significance; the translators belonged to two
linguistic and cultural worlds. In a period in which any deviation
from the mainstream was regarded with sus-picion, it is important to
understand the intellectual history of early modern Italy.

Shlomo Simonsohn concludes the volume with a paper on research on
Jewish culture in Mantua. He emphasizes the singular and most
impressive contribution made by the Jewish community of
Mantua—thanks to the diverse backgrounds of its members and its
intense contact with Christian culture—in the arts, philosophy, and
the natural sciences, across the boundaries of the Duchy of the Gongazas.

Judah Moscato Sermons: Edition and Translation, Volume One by
Gianfranco Miletto and Giuseppe Veltri (Studies in Jewish
History and Culture: Brill Academic) Judah ben Joseph Moscato (c.1533–1590) was one of the most
distinguished rabbis, authors, and preachers of the Italian-Jewish
Renaissance. The book Sefer Nefusot Yehudah belongs to the
very centre of his important homiletic and philosophical oeuvre.
Composed in Mantua and published in Venice in 1589, the collection
of 52 sermons addresses the subject of the Jewish festivals,
focusing on philosophy, mysticism, sciences and rites. This and
subsequent volumes will provide a critical edition of the original
Hebrew text, accompanied by an English translation. All those interested in intellectual history, the history of Jewish philosophy, homiletics, philologists, theologians, and specialists of Hebraic and Italian culture.

Gianfranco Miletto is university private lecturer (“Privatdozent”)
at the University of Halle-Wittenberg. He has published on Biblical
Philology and on the Jewish culture in Italy at the time of the
Renaissance and Counter-Reformation: L’ Antico Testamento Ebraico
nella tradizione babilonese (1992); Die Heldenschilde des Abraham
ben David Portaleone, 2 vols. (2003); Glauben und Wissen im
Zeitalter der Reformation (2004).

Giuseppe Veltri, is Professor of Jewish Studies at the
University of Halle-Wittenberg and Director of the Zunz Centre
(Halle). He has published widely in the subjects of hermeneutics and
philosophy including Gegenwart der Tradition (2002), Cultural
Intermediaries (2004 with D. Ruderman); Libraries, Translation and
'Canonic texts' (2006); The Jewish Body (2008, with M. Diemling);
Renaissance Philosophy in Jewish Garb (2009)

Excerpt: The work of Judah ben Joseph Moscato
(1532/33-159o), one of the most distinguished rabbis, authors, and
preachers of the Jewish-Italian Renaissance, attests to the
multifarious impact that Italian Judaism had upon developments in
intellectual history. Moscato should be regarded as a crucial figure
in the process of reciprocal interaction between Jewish and
Christian ideas; this was facilitated by his affinities to
Neoplatonic and Pythagorean thought. In addition, his work is an
outstanding example of the way in which Italian culture often shaped
interpretations of Kabbalah, beginning with its arrival from Spain
or from the Ottoman Empire. As a rabbi, Moscato represented the
Jewish tradition and observed Jewish law, but due to his tremendous
classical and secular knowledge, he was always considered to be a
homo universalis (hakham kolel). Indeed, Moscato's works evince his
permanent struggle to bridge the tension between the Jewish
tradition and the secular world, and his twofold education already
fascinated his contemporaries: Moscato's works were appreciated not
only by Jewish scholars such as Abraham ben David Portaleone, Judah
del Bene, and Moses Provenzali, but also by various Christian
authors. Thus, Moscato was one of the Jewish sources that Athanasius
Kircher drew on for his Musurgia Universalis.

Although scholars consider Judah Moscato to be a distinctive
representative of Jewish culture in Renaissance Italy, very few
aspects of his sermons have been critically examined. Leopold Zunz's
study Die gottesdienstlichen Vortrage der Juden, historisch
entwickelt (1832) marks the beginning of the scholarly preoccupation
with Jewish homiletics, as well as the moment of Moscato's
rediscovery. This pioneering work of Zunz laid the groundwork for
later examinations, which were undertaken by Abraham Apfelbaum,
Israel Bettan, Marc Saperstein, and Moshe Idel. Alexander Altmann
has pointed out the importance of rhetoric within Moscato's work,
and Adam Shear has begun the critical endeavor of positioning
Moscato within the humanistic context of Renaissance Italy. In
editing and translating his work, we aim to do justice to Moscato
and to further demonstrate his importance for Jewish philosophy and
cultural history, as well as for the general Italian Renaissance.

Two works by Moscato have been published: his collection of
sermons, entitled Nefusot Yehudah (Venice: Giovanni di Gara, 1589)
and his well-known commentary on Judah Halevi's Sefer ha-Kuzari,
entitled Qol Yehudah (Venice: Giovanni di Gara, 1594). His
collection of sermons is undoubtedly the rarer of the two works.
After the publication of the first edition by Giovanni di Gara, it
was printed again in 1859 in Lvov (Lemberg in German) by Kornel
Piller, in 1871 in Warsaw by Isaac Goldmann (reprinted by Achim
Goldenberg, Brooklyn, 1992), and in 2000 in Bnei Brak by Sifre
Qodesh Mishor. Most of these editions are old and not easily
available, and only a few copies of the modern editions have been
printed. Furthermore, they do not always faithfully reproduce the
text of the first edition of Venice.

The present edition reproduces the text of the edition published
by Giovanni di Gara in 1589, with only slight changes. Moscato's
corrections to the first edition, which appeared at the end of the
book, have been silently incorporated into the text. The readings
that are evidently erroneous but not corrected by Moscato have been
enclosed in brackets { }, and the correct reading has been inserted
in square brackets [ 1. Page numbers of the Venetian edition have
been placed in square brackets; the letters a and b in the
translation, and x and in the Hebrew text, indicate respectively the
recto and verso of each page. Each sentence has been numbered in
order to facilitate comparison of the English translation and the
Hebrew text. The edition published by Sifre Qodesh Mishor has been
consulted, especially for its references to quoted sources. The
introductory narrative (fol. 39, the contents (luah ha-derushim,
fols. 3b-79, and the tables of biblical and Talmudic quotations
(fols. 7b-102) and biblical pericopes (fols. 10b-14b, the first
pagination of the introduction),' have not been included in this
edition and have not been translated.

The English translation tries to render the Hebrew text as
faithfully as possible. Long quotations of other authors by Moscato
have been reproduced in a smaller typeface, while short quotations
are enclosed in quotation marks. For this reason, the expression in
/17 which indicates the end of a quotation has not been translated.

This edition, including the translation of the first ten sermons,
would not have been possible without the cooperation of many
scholars, to all of whom the editors are deeply indebted. Ramona
Wollner prepared the Hebrew edition, which has been checked,
corrected, and standardized by Giacomo Corazzol and Regina Grundmann. Don Harrán edited,
translated, and annotated the first sermon. Aleida Paudice (sermon
2), Elke Morlok (sermons 6, 7, 8 and 9), and Rebekka Vob (3, 5) were
involved in the first phase of the translation, which has been
totally revised and completed by Giacomo Corazzol, Regina Grundmann,
and Brian Ogren. Roni Weinstein assisted in transcribing the Hebrew
documents of the introduction. Adam Shear monitored the translation
process, giving precious advice on translation and commentary.

It is our intention within this introduction to the first volume
of the edition and translation of the sermons of Rabbi Judah ben
Joseph Moscato of Mantua to present the reader with hitherto unknown
aspects of his biography, derived from documents recently discovered
in the archives of Mantua.' We will also outline some of the general
features of the collection of sermons that we are editing and
translating. An examination of Moscato's novelty within Renaissance
culture and scholarship, as well as an analysis of his concepts,
reception, and innovation, will be the task of the last volume of
our project; at that point, the whole of Moscato's preaching will be
available to the reader.

Recently discovered documents housed in the State Archives of
Mantua and in the Archives of the Jewish Community of Mantua provide
astonishing and previously unknown information concerning Moscato's
life, personality, and career as a rabbi. Despite his literary fame,
the biographical data about Judah Moscato are fragmentary and
uncertain. Until recently, even the dates of his birth and death
were unknown. This lacuna has been filled by the recent discovery of
his death certificate in the State Archives of Mantua, which also
indicates his date of birth. According to the death certificate,
Moscato died in Mantua on September 20, 159o, at the age of 57.2 He
was therefore born in 1532 or 1533.

When Moscato died, he was the ordained rabbi of the Jewish
community of Mantua; nevertheless, he was not a native of that city.
He was born in Osimo, a small town in the province of Ancona, in the
Marche region of central Italy. It is uncertain when he went to
Mantua. Moscato dedicated his book of sermons, Nefusot Yehudah, to
his brother-in-law R. Samuel ben Joshua Minzi Berettaro. This
dedication was an expression of gratitude for the latter's having
given Moscato shelter in his house when he came to Mantua as a
fugitive. According to Abe Apfelbaum, Moscato's reference to his
fugitive status alludes to the persecutions of the Jews of Ancona
and of the Marche region, which happened between 1554 and 1558,
during the reign of Pope Paul IV (1555-1559).3 Shlomo Simonsohn
disagrees, and maintains that Moscato's words refer to the expulsion
of the Jews from all of the Papal States except Rome and Ancona.
This expulsion was decreed by Pope Pius V (1566-1572) on February
26, 1569, in the bull Hebraeorum gens sola.4 There are no documents
in the State Archives of Mantua that support either of these
hypotheses. It is probable that Moscato settled in Mantua during the
reign of Pope Paul IV, because by around 157o, Moscato was already
an outstanding personality in the Mantuan Jewish community.

In 1581 Gregory XIII (1572-1585) issued two bulls concerning the
Jews: in Alias piae memoriae of May 3o, Jewish physicians were
prohibited from attending to Christians; in Antigua Iudaeorum
improbitas of July 1, the pope submitted the Jews to the Inquisition
in all cases of blasphemy and offense against the church. Such
offenses included the protection of marranos and heretics, the
possession of forbidden books, and the employment of Christian
servants. The bulls were in full force in the Papal States, and the
pope urged the implementation of these anti-Jewish instructions in
all Catholic countries. The Jews, however, vehemently appealed to
their rulers against these papal ordinances. In Mantua, Duke
Guglielmo I Gonzaga (1550-1587), though a strictly observant
Catholic, wanted to defend his autonomy from papal interference and
initially blocked the publication of the bulls. In addition to the
political aims of the duke, there were also practical reasons for
not carrying out the papal enactments in Mantua. For example, the
prohibition of Jewish physicians tending to Christians would have
left whole communities without medical care. This prohibition was
not new,5 and already in 1576, when Duke Guglielmo tried to enforce
the papal laws against Jewish physicians that were reconfirmed by
the bull Romanus Pontifex (April 19, 1566) of Pope Pius V, protests
had occurred in the country. Indeed, in 1577, the senior priest of
the village of Sermide in the district of Mantua, four other local
clerics, the official in charge of the neighboring village Carbonara
Po, and nineteen prominent residents of Sermide requested that Duke
Guglielmo allow the Jewish physician Abraham Portaleone and his son
Leone (Judah) to continue practicing medicine, as they had done
until then, for the benefit of the whole community. In the end, the
duke had no choice but to grant this request.

In 1581, several petitions against the publication of the papal
bulls in general, or requests for specific exemptions from them,
were addressed to the duke.' In this case as well, Duke Guglielmo
granted the request and prohibited the bishop from publishing the
bulls. The bishop of Mantua, Marco Fedeli Gonzaga, took note of the
prohibition and asked the secretary of the duke, Aurelio Zibramonti,
how he could justify the suppression of the bulls to Rome.'
Notwithstanding this prohibition, the bishop pressed for the bulls
to be published, at least in the cathedral; the bishop of Ferrara
had done the same. In a letter to Aurelio Zibramonti written on
August 1o,1581, the bishop maintained that it was impossible for him
to disobey the orders of the pope. On the part of the duke, he had
ordered the Jewish community to provide evidence that other princes
had not enforced the restrictive ecclesiastical enactments within
their domains. This was a ploy to justify his refusal to carry out the
bulls to the Holy See. The Mantuan Jews took this task upon
themselves and speedily satisfied the wish of the duke. On July 24,
1581, a letter signed by "Leon de Moscati Hebreo" and "Leon da Pisa
Hebreo" was sent to the duke with the requested documentation. They
had carried out the orders of the duke and asked several Jewish
communities how their princes had responded to the papal bulls
against the Jews. From Ferrara, Cremona, and Parma, the answers came
with documentary proof. Copies of these documents were enclosed with
the letter from Moscato and da Pisa; they kept the originals, which
they offered to show to the duke. In the letter, Moscato and da Pisa
noted that further replies from other locales were expected and
would be either be forwarded from Mantua or sent directly from those
locales. The Jews of these states had already been informed,
according to Moscato and da Pisa, to send all necessary information
as quickly as possible.

This letter is not addressed, and the name of the recipient is
missing. Nevertheless, it can be conjectured that the letter was
intended for Pompeo Strozzi, the ambassador of Duke Guglielmo
Gonzaga to the Holy See. This conjecture stems from a second letter
that Moscato, also in the name of da Pisa, sent to Strozzi three
days later, on July 27, 1581. In this letter, Moscato refers to the
two packets of information from Ferrara, Cremona, Venice, and Parma
that had been sent with the former letter. Moscato mentions learning
that in Ferrara, the bulls had been published "in some isolated
places" without the permission of the duke, and he felt that it was
proper to warn him."

In July of 1581, the Mantuan ambassador to Rome received
instructions from the secretary of Duke Guglielmo to explain to the
Holy See the nonenforcement of the bulls. In order to support the
diplomatic activity of the ambassador, Aurelio Zibramonti sent a
letter to him on July 25 that confirmed what Moscato and da Pisa had
already reported. In addition, the Mantuan ambassador to Venice,
Pace Moro, stated that the patriarch would not publish the bulls
without the permission of the Venetian government.

On August 4, 1581, "Abramo Baroco, Ebreo levantino" wrote from
Florence to Pompeo Strozzi, having been asked by "messer Leone
Moscato" and "messer Leone da Pisa" to inform Strozzi about the
attitude of the granduca towards the question of the papal bulls. He
attested that the bulls had not been published in Florence, and
moreover would not be published, because the granduca had once again
confirmed the privileges granted to the Jews in his state."

Within these letters, Moscato and da Pisa are only referred to as
"messer"; nothing is said about their function as representatives of
the Jewish community. Judah (Leone) da Pisa was a wealthy banker and
often acted as a spokesman for the community." Moscato's position is
hard to determine. Was he already at this time the appointed rabbi
of the community, or had he signed the letters only because he was a
renowned scholar?

In his work Me'or 'Enayim, which was written between 1571 and
1572, the sixty-year-old Azariah dei Rossi (1511?-1577?) expressed
high regard for Moscato, even though the latter was twenty years
younger. Indeed, Azariah called Moscato "the great Mantuan Rabbi,"
and between 1573 and 1574, Moscato was deeply involved in a dispute
concerning dei Rossi's Me'or 'Enayim, in which he supported and
defended dei Rossi against his antagonists. In 1577, Moscato acted
as an arbitrator, together with R. Gershon ha-Kohen Porto, in a
legal affair concerning the bankers Abraham ben Hananiah dei
Galicchi Jagel and Samuel Almagiati.

Sermon One: Sounds for Contemplation on a Lyre

Sermon I is a paean to music, understood in its most inclusive
sense as harmony. It begins with an enigmatic Midrash about a kinnor
(lyre) that, hanging over David's bed, is blown by the north wind at
midnight, whereupon it plays of itself; David then rises and studies
Torah until the break of day (I: 4). The rest of the sermon explains
the Midrash, its relevance to the day on which it was pronounced
(Simhat Torah), and its implications for Jewish observance. It first
establishes the mathematical basis of music as a science for
measuring intervals: consonances are defined by their harmonic
ratios. The science of music was thought to have been introduced by
the Greeks, though wrongly so: the Hebrews were its inventors (I:
5-14). God is the perfect embodiment of music in His essence, as
reflected in His creation of all heavenly bodies and creatures: the
nine spheres resonate with music and the angels intone their songs
(I: 1544). The Holy Name (YHWH) encompasses the principal
consonances: octave, fifth, fourth, third, and their compounds (I:
45-55). Man, created in the image of his Maker, is ordered in
intervallic ratios: harmony is implanted in his soul, which,
attracted to song, reacts to it by producing a song of its own (I:
56-84). He is likened, in his musical construction, to a kinnor, yet
for his potential kinnor to play properly, i.e., to actuate the
music in his soul, he must pursue a path of righteousness:
hearkening to a divine instrument, he responds by duplicating its
pitches (I: 85-9o). The original Midrash is now reinterpreted (and
its different versions in the Babylonian and Jerusalem Talmud
compared): David's body and soul were built in harmonic ratios, his
mind was awakened by the sounds of his kinnor when the north wind
blew upon it at midnight, at which time, "sailing forth upon lofty
speculations," he played on his kinnor by deepening his knowledge of
Torah (I: 91-113). Because the Midrash was not easily applied, God
provided a consummate example of harmony for all to emulate: Moses.
His name pertains to music (via the muses and other correspondences
in its etymology); he was ever in tune with the divine spirit; he
composed a perfect song—Torah, or belief—that succeeds the seven
liberal arts as the eighth and highest science (I: 114-131). Torah relates to Shemini Aseret (The Eighth Day of Convocation) and
Simhat Torah (Rejoicing in the Law), marking the completion and
renewal of its readings; it relates to song, for just as Torah is
perfection, so is the octave (or "eighth") in music; it relates to
circumcision, for on the eighth day after birth the newborn male
enters thereby into the faith (I: 132-142). Though all should strive
to be like Moses, clearly none can reach his perfection, nor is
anyone expected to; rather people are measured by the degree to
which they exert themselves to observe his laws (I: 143-164).
Because humans are fallible, David offers a more reasonable example:
he repaired his sins by endeavoring to walk on "an upright path,"
whereby, in time, his kinnor, as stated in the Midrash, played of
itself (165-174). That God's "laws [Torah] had become songs to
[him]"' can be illustrated by his book of Psalms, especially the
last one, where, in each verse, David renders praises to God through
song, as should the people of Israel after his example (I: 175-186).
The movements of the spheres correspond to those of the soul (one
toward essences, the other toward their incorporation in matter);
the seven terms for song2 correspond to the seven sciences, though
the eighth term ("cymbals for jubilation") designates belief, or
Torah, as the eighth science (I: 187-204). With the coming of the
Messiah, the world will become perfect in its harmonies: a new song
will be sung when the Jews are released from suffering and
subordination (I: 205-211).

Sermon Two: Song of Ascents of David

This sermon elaborates on a passage from Midrash Bereshit Rabbah
68: 11, which states that during the years that Jacob spent in the
house of Laban, he would recite David's fifteen Songs of Ascents.'
It also elaborates on another passage from the same Midrash, in
which the first verses of the second Song of Ascents are interpreted
as hinting at Jacob and his oppressors, i.e., Esau and Laban.4
Moscato aims at demonstrating that in writing these psalms, David
followed and epitomized the events of Jacob's life step by step,
from the moment he fled from his brother Esau' until

the moment he came back to his father.6 According to Moscato,
because of the fact that this part of Jacob's life represents a
prefiguration of the wandering and sufferings later experienced by
Israel, these psalms are meant to be a summary of the main notions
and teachings concerning Israel's exile. Thus, David called these
compositions shir ha-ma'alot, i.e., Songs of "ascents:' "degrees:'
"steps:' or "rungs:' following the hint provided by the ladder that
was seen by Jacob in a nocturnal vision in Bet El. Indeed, Moscato
deems Jacob's ladder to be an allusion to the rise and fall of the
four empires that will have existed prior to Israel's final
redemption; this is in line with the interpretations put forward by
Nachmanides and Obadiah Sforno. Moreover, according to Moscato, the
number of psalms dedicated by David to this theme, namely fifteen,
hints at the name Yah, whose numerical value is fifteen; this is an
epithet of the tenth sefirah, the Divine Presence, which is bound to
protect and to watch over Israel during its exile. A summary of the
events of chapters 28-35 of Genesis ensues, which is followed by a
detailed commentary on the fifteen Psalms of Ascents. The
correspondences between the events related in those chapters in
Genesis and Psalms 120-134 are pinpointed.

The third section of the sermon demonstrates that David did not
include any references to the episode of Jacob and Rachel at the
well within his Songs of Ascents, in order to let his son Solomon
elaborate upon it. By doing so, Solomon could redress his youthful
sins, which involved relationships with foreign women. This
assumption is based on a kabbalistic interpretation, according to
which the three herds that were seen by Jacob around the well
represent Israel, or more accurately, the three "Israels" that were
brought into exile at different times. According to this
interpretation, the well represents the vitalizing power of the
tenth sefirah, and the stone that seals the well represents the
interruption of the benign influx of God upon Israel; this
interruption leads to the pain of exile. According to Moscato, the
kiss between Jacob and Rachel' alludes to the final redemption. At
this point, the sixth sefirah (hinted at by Jacob) and the tenth
sefirah (hinted at by Rachel) shall reunite in a sefirotic reunion;
this is also the kabbalistic meaning usually attributed to the Song
of Songs. In particular, Moscato bases himself on the authority of
the zoharic Midrash on Song of Songs, and points out a parallel
between the kiss spoken of in Genesis 29: 11 and the kisses of the
Song of Songs 1: 2 (Let him kiss me with the kisses of his mouth—for
thy love is better than

wine). Both of these verses, he points out, are composed of seven
words. In the last paragraph, Moscato explains the reasons for the
particular holiness of Solomon's Song of Songs, which Moscato
characterizes as the holiest of all songs and which is therefore
also holier, in his opinion, than all of the fifteen Songs of
Ascents.

Sermon Three: Fearful in Praises

This sermon is a treatise about the attributes of God. Basing
himself upon negative theology, Moscato believes that human beings
cannot describe the essence of God. Whatever attributes man might
ascribe to God are insufficient and ultimately false. Human beings
can only speak about God from their point of view as finite
creatures. God, however, as the untreated Creator of the All, is
separate from the physical universe and thus exists outside of the
realms of space and time. God is therefore absolutely different from
everything else and is, in consequence, totally unknowable. Moscato
agrees with Joseph Albo that all attributes of God are infinite in
perfection and importance, and in time and number. However, as
Maimonides and Albo had already explained before Moscato, the
unlimited plurality of God's attributes does not entail plurality in
God's essence. Indeed, all attributes are nothing but the
intellectual observations of man, and all of them are unified in
Him, as He is truly "One" and is Absolute Simplicity.

As Ecclesiastes 5: 1 says: For God is in heaven, and thou upon
earth; therefore let thy words be few. According to Moscato, this
verse means to say that man cannot make any direct statements about
God. Nevertheless, it is possible to describe God indirectly and to
specify what He is not; this is in line with the via negativa, which
allows for the attribution of "negative attributes" in relation to
the divine. Through God's interaction with creation, man can
acknowledge His gracious providence towards his creatures. For this
reason, Moses and the men of the Great Assembly permitted the praise
of God with three attributes: Great, Mighty, and Awesome. This was
in order to teach that He is the source and origin of all
perfections, which ultimately emanate from Him. Indeed, according to
Moscato, these three predicates are superior categories and include
all perfections, which are all contained in knowledge, power, and
will.

Sermon Four: A Remembrance for the Work of Creation

This sermon discusses the tenet according to which God created
the world anew, from complete nothingness and through a simple act
of His will. According to Moscato, this idea informs the whole of
Psalm 19: 3 and is to be found in nuce in verses 89-90 of Psalm 119.
He claims that it can also be evinced from Exodus 12: 39, which
tells of Israel's abrupt flight from Egypt and of the commandment to
eat masah.

The sermon opens with a rabbinic interpretation of Psalm 19: 2:
"The heavens declare the glory of God" According to this
interpretation, only those who live close to a king can properly
speak of his actual wealth; similarly, only the heavens can truly
reveal the full glory of God. This Midrash provides the starting
point for Moscato's discussions in the second part of this sermon.
Moscato uses Exodus 12: 39 to claim that in order to know something,
one must know its causes. He points out that masah has all of the
four causes, i.e., the material cause (the masah itself), the formal
cause (the allegorical sense inherent in the masah), the efficient
cause (which is twofold: the Lord and the Israelites) and the final
cause (which is twofold as well: the performance of the commandment
by the Israelites and the final redemption wrought by the Lord).
Although Moscato states that he shall concentrate on the formal
cause, he touches upon all of the mentioned issues. Moscato argues
against some of the interpreters who preceded him by introducing two
objections: The first is that if the prohibition to eat leaven and
the obligation to eat masah are two sides of the same coin, as
previous interpreters have maintained, then it does not make sense
that the first is to be observed for seven days, whereas the second
is to be observed only on the first night. The second is that if the
only reason for the commandment is the hurriedness with which the
Israelites were compelled to flee, then it does not make sense that
God would warn them not to eat leaven for seven days.

In order to solve these contradictions, Moscato first recalls
Nachmanides' opinion that the preparation of masah was a direct
consequence of the prohibition to eat leaven. Indeed, Moscato
argues, since the yeast to make the dough rise is usually taken from
the dough produced in the preceding days, the prohibition of leaven
is aimed at representing a symbolic break from the past. This
symbolic break itself symbolizes God's novel creation of the world,
which is the reason why the commandment of the masah is confined to
the first day of Passover, while the prohibition of leaven lasts for
seven days; these seven days are indicative of the seven days of
creation.

Moscato then turns to a different symbol, the lamb. Inasmuch as
the lamb hints at the constellation of Aries, which was predominant
at the time of year when the exodus took place, the sacrifice of the
lamb represents God's prevalence over the power of the planets and
the constellations. Thanks to God's mercy, Israel, who had not yet
been given the Torah and was therefore devoid of merits (apart from
the fulfillment of the commandments of circumcision and of the
sacrifice of the paschal lamb) was saved from its own captivity.

Moscato proceeds by presenting two passages of the Midrash as
allegories of the miraculous timeliness with which God saved Israel,
and the subsequent astonishment of the Egyptians. The second passage
is used to show that in order to save Israel, God actually subverted
the ongoing disposition of the constellations and their powers. In
turn, these miracles testify to God's creation out of his own will.
Thus, according to Moscato, the final part of the Decalogue
stipulates the belief in this fundamental tenet. It suggests that
God brought Israel out of Egypt in order to give them the Torah (the
first final cause).

Moscato then treats the different kinds of praises addressed to
the Lord: those given by the common people, those given by the
philosophers, and those of the prophets. Each of these types attains
a higher degree of subservience and self-effacement than the one
preceding it.

Moscato next proceeds to explain that in order for God to save
Israel, the latter had to fulfill at least some of the commandments.
These are represented by the circumcision and the sacrifice of the
Paschal Lamb, both of which entail the spilling of blood. On the
basis of the "two bloods" mentioned in Ezekiel 16: 6, Moscato draws
a parallel between the blood (dam) spilled during the ceremony of
circumcision in order to be redeemed, and the money (damim) that the
members of a community must give in order to redeem their
coreligionists.

But how many times shall Israel be enslaved and saved? With the
help of the masorah, Moscato points out the biblical verses9 that
hint at the three captivities of Israel: in Egypt, in Babylon, and
lastly, among the nations. Salvation from the third of these will
coincide with the final redemption (the second final cause).

The second part of the sermon is largely devoted to an
elucidation of Psalm 19. Moscato first uses the interpretive method
of acronyms to show how this Psalm alludes to the tenet of novel
creation: indeed, as he points out, the opening words of this Psalm
and the opening words of Genesis both allude to the word "truth"
(emet). Since the tenet of novel creation is one of the principal
hinges of the true faith, Moscato continues, the word "truth" is
itself a hint at this dogma.

Nevertheless, the Psalm's allusion to novel creation is also
evident through speculative analysis. Moscato aims at demonstrating,
on mathematical grounds, the idea that the world was created anew
because of God's will. Indeed, according to Moscato, verses 2-6 of
the Psalm allude to the fact that it is impossible for the universe
to have infinite dimensions, inasmuch as a body that moves in a
circular motion must necessarily be finite.

The second part of the Psalm is interpreted as an explanation of
the main qualities and characteristics of the Torah. According to
Moscato, the proof of the Torah's truth is provided by the senses,
by the intellect, and by tradition, and thus its truth can be
grasped by all kinds of men. The sermon closes with a short
explanation of Psalm 119: 89-9o.

Sermon Five: Scroll of Orders

The fifth sermon focuses on the relationship between the order of
the Torah and the philosophical or rhetorical orders. Joseph Albo's
Sefer ha-lqqarim, Maimonides' Moreh Nevukhim, and Aristotle's De
Anima, Physica, and Topica serve as the main philosophical sources
for Moscato. In addition to these philosophical sources, he also
refers in this sermon to rhetorical works, such as Galen's Ars
Parva, Cicero's Partitiones Oratoriae, and Agricola's De Inventione
Dialectica.

Moscato demonstrates that the three Orders—the Natural Order
(ordo naturalis), the Order of Free Will (liberum arbitrium), and
the Artifical Order (ordo artificialis)—are not only included in the
gemara, but are also followed by the Torah. These three Orders
correspond to the three Orders of Teaching (methodi)—Analysis
(resolutio), Synthesis (compositio), and Definition
(definitio)—which are deduced from biblical and rabbinic sources as
well. The resolutio represents the Natural Order, the compositio is
compared to the Artifical Order, and the definitio represents the
Order of Free Will. Each of these Orders is discussed in regard to
the teaching and study of knowledge and wisdom. Moscato also argues
that the four parts of rhetorical speech can be found in the gemara,
and he relates these parts to the three names attributed to the
angel: Pisqon corresponds to the propositio, including the exordium;
Itamon corresponds to the

argumentatio; and Sigaron corresponds to the conclusio. The Law
of God
is perfect and represents a marvelous order, since all of these
orders are

prefigured in the Torah.

Sermon Six: Things Whose Creation Preceded the World

This sermon aims at overcoming the apparent discrepancies found
in rabbinic literature concerning the number and nature of things
that were brought forth prior to the creation of the world. The
majority of rabbinic sources name seven items,'° but in Midrash
Bereshit Rabbah 1: 4, reference is made to only six creatures.
Moreover, whereas all sources agree concerning the preliminary
creation of the Torah, the Throne of Glory, the Sanctuary, and the
name of the Messiah, some also include Repentance, the Garden of
Eden, and Gehinnom, while others ignore these in favor of the
Patriarchs and Israel.

Moscato explains these discrepancies on the basis of the fact
that man's capability to understand and to grasp divine things
differs from one individual to the other. In order to demonstrate
that all nine of the things mentioned in the sources were brought
forth prior to creation (whether in act or in potency), Moscato
describes the specific role that each of these things played in
creation and in the arrangement and history of the universe.
Throughout, he stresses the interconnection between all of these
elements. According to Moscato, the first things created were the
Torah and the Throne of the Glory. The Torah is "the flame bursting
from the spark of the Lord's infinite wisdom," a flame whose light
was destined for the Patriarchs and Israel, by means of whom the
world is kept in existence. Indeed, it is through the Patriarchs
that the notion of the existence of God and of divine wisdom are
spread throughout the world. According to Moscato, the Sanctuary
represents the initial place chosen by the Lord as a place at which
Israel might seek Him. Nevertheless, this was not sufficient, and
since man is bound to sin and to stray from the path of the Law, the
Lord set Repentance as the remedy, the Garden of Eden as the reward,
and Gehinnom as the punishment for man's transgressions. Due to
man's tendency, God also decreed that Israel should go into exile in
order for it to be rescued and redeemed by the Messiah; for this
reason, the latter's name is mentioned in rabbinic literature as an
entity that was in existence before the creation of the world. Of
the sources, only Midrash Bereshit Rabbah 1: 4 makes the distinction
between those things that were created in act (the Torah and the
Throne of Glory) and those that were created in potential. Moscato
claims that this discrepancy does not represent a contradiction, as
the verb "to create" encompasses both notions without distinction.
In the last part of the sermon, Moscato points out that in Proverbs
8: 22-31, Solomon himself hinted at the nine things created before
Creation.

Sermon Seven: The Power of Torah in the Creation of the World

In this sermon, Moscato endeavors to account for the explanation
of Proverbs 8: 3o (Then I was by Him, as one brought up [Hebrew
amon] with him), which is given in the opening paragraph of Midrash
Bereshit Rabbah. There, the word amon, although ultimately
identified with the Torah, is interpreted in accord with its various
vocalizations and permutations to mean "tutor:' "covered:'
"concealed:' "great:' and "craftsman:' In this context, Moscato
identifies the Torah with the "cause" at the origin of the cosmos,
due to the fact that it is the model that God followed in creating
and shaping the universe. According to Moscato, the different
translations of the term amon accord with the six different kinds of
"cause" pointed out by Plato, namely, the agent, the material, the
formal, the final, the instrumental, and the rational. The sixth of
these is hinted at by the words of the Midrash, which state that
"the architect, moreover, does not build it out of his head, but
employs parchments:' The parallel between the Torah and Plato's six
causes is soon abandoned by Moscato in favor of Aristotle's theory
of the four causes. In order to substantiate his interpretation,
Moscato bases himself on the identity of "Torah" with "truth:' as
outlined in Malachi 2: 6. He states that a proof for his
interpretation is to be found in the word "desirest" (hafasta) in
Psalms 51: 6: "Behold, thou desirest [hafa.sta] truth:' This word is
an acronym of the words "matter" (homer, material cause), "agent"
(po'el, agent cause), "form" (surah, formal cause), and "purpose"
(takhlit, final cause). The second part of this sermon is intended
to demonstrate that the first four interpretations of the term amon,
i.e., "tutor:' "covered:' "concealed:' and "great:' also correspond
to the fourfold theory of interpretation. In Moscato's view, the
following series of equations can be drawn: Tutor—agent cause—literal sense (peshat); covered—material
cause—allegorical sense (remez); concealed—formal cause—tropological (or moral)
sense (derash); great—final cause—anagogical sense (sod). The sermon
ends with a cautionary note that points out that although the
innermost sense is fundamental, inasmuch as it enables one to
effectively accomplish the commandments of the Torah, one may not
discard any part or any sense of the Torah. In Moscato's opinion,
the literal sense is just as important as the secret kabbalistic
sense.

Sermon Eight: The Wrapping of
Light in Order to Brighten the World

In this sermon, Moscato endeavors to clarify three rabbinic
notions with the use of Platonic thought. The first of these notions
is that God "wrapped Himself in a garment and brightened the whole
world with His light."" The second is that the heavens were created
"from the light of the Lord's garment." And the third is that the
earth was created "from the snow that is under the Throne of the
Glory."" Despite the puzzlement of previous commentators, according
to Moscato, these three ideas become clear if interpreted in light
of Platonic doctrines.

Moscato begins by stating that the first being that was emanated
from God was created without an intermediary and is a most perfect
and unknowable entity. Within this entity, God infused all of the
ideas (i.e., the archetypes) in a state of complete perfection.
Basing himself on the testimony of Pico della Mirandola, Moscato
claims that this first stage of emanation was called "the son of
God" by Plato and other ancient thinkers; this is precisely what
Solomon, "the wisest of all men," referred to when he asked: "What
is his name and what is the name of his son, if you know?" This
first causatum is said to have two faces: the upper one is perfect
and perfectly resembles the Emanator, and the lower one emanates the
Soul of the World. This latter entity gives lower beings their form
and bestows a soul upon everything that can endure one (i.e., the
spheres, the angels, and man). Moscato notes that this is called a
"garment," and goes on to discuss the reason that a term such as
"garment," which denotes a material thing, would be applied to a
being as lofty as the first causatum. Moscato explains that Plato
identifies four stages of existence, each endowed with a lesser
degree of perfection. In descending order, these are ideas, separate
intellects, souls, and material things; each of these is more
"material" than its precedent. From this, Moscato concludes that
"the light of His garment" (also called "Holy Sanctuary," and "the
Glory of the God of Israel") is to be identified with the first
causatum, which works as a "throne" for God. Moscato also
determines, on this basis, that the "earth" spoken of in Pirqe
de-Rabbi Eli`ezer designates all of the lower stages of Creation.
Accordingly, the "snow [ ... ] under the Throne of the Glory:' from
which the earth was created, is to be identified with the Soul of
the World. The metaphors put forward by the rabbis are therefore
highly praised by Moscato. According to him, the first causatum
perfectly adheres to God, just as a garment adheres to the form of
the body that it covers. Similarly, the Soul of the World is apt to
receive all forms, just as snow is apt to reflect all colors.

Sermon Nine: Microcosm

In this long sermon, Moscato deals with the issue of man as a
microcosm. Divine wisdom established that man should be in the image
and mold of the entirety of all of existence. Inasmuch as man is the
seal of all of creation, modern and ancient wise men say that man is
a microcosm. Moscato connects this old and widespread concept of man
to the statement of the Mishnah that "Whosoever destroys a single
soul of Israel, it is as though he had destroyed an entire world:'"

Man as a microcosm corresponds to heaven, which symbolizes the
intellect, and earth, which symbolizes matter. The Lord made a
perfect man who contains all of the existents in his knowledge, and
from these he acknowledges his Creator. The perfection of man
depends on his active knowledge being all-inclusive of all the
intelligibles. After the sin of the first man, however, man became
deficient in his intellectual faculty. Due to this deficiency, God
gave the Torah to Israel, in order that Israel could attain perfect,
all-inclusive knowledge.

Man also correlates with the universe in terms of his body; this
is maintained by Plato, Maimonides, Abraham Ibn Ezra, and Judah
Halevi, and is proven by several passages of Scripture.

This totality of perfection was within the first man, the work of
God's hands, before his disobedience. After the sin of Adam, man's
intellect became unable to attain a clear understanding of the works
of God without divine enlightenment.

Perfection, which Adam lost because of his rebellion, was
restored in Abraham and his descendants, who received the Torah.
Israel, however, with their sin of the calf, awoke judgment against
them and spoiled the perfection that Abraham had obtained. Only in
the future, through the coming of the expected Redeemer, will Israel
return to its former state of glory; this final time, it will be
forever. Moscato parallels the three stages of human history to the
Sanctuary: the first and the second Sanctuaries were built and
destroyed, but the third and last Sanctuary of the messianic age
will be built and will stand firm forever.

Sermon Ten: The Soul of Man Is the Lamp
of the Lord: Ye Shall Eat Nothing Leavened

Sermon ten is a psychological and ethical treatise about man's
soul and about love. The main philosophical sources for the sermon
are the Sefer ha-'Iqqarim of Joseph Albo, and the Shemonah Peraqim
and the Moreh Nevukhim of Maimonides. Following Maimonides, who
accepts Aristotle's tripartite division of the soul, Moscato
considers man's soul to be one entity with three distinct functions:
the vegetative (anima vegetabilis or vegetativa), the sensitive
(anima sensibilis / sensitiva or animalis), and the rational (intellectiva/
intellectualis or rationalis, intelligibilis). Three Hebrew names
for the soul, nefesh, ruah, and neshamah, correspond respectively to
these three faculties, which are carried by the liver (anima
vegetabilis), the heart (anima sensibilis), and the brain (anima
intellectiva) respectively. Related to the soul's faculties are the
three kinds of love: that of the pleasant, that of the useful, and
that of the good. All of these types of love lead to God, who is the
source and root of the absolute good, the pleasant good, and the
useful good. The only way to reach perfect love is the Torah, which
strengthens the intellective soul. Events in the lives of the
biblical ancestors exemplify the three types of love. The three
pilgrimage festivals of Pesach, Shavu'ot, and Sukkot remind the sons
of Israel that all the parts of the soul are to be brought to
perfection, so that they can love God with all of their faculties.

Judah Moscato Sermons: Edition and Translation, Volume Two
by Judah ben Joseph Moscato (Studies
in Jewish History and Culture: Brill Academic) This second volume of Judah Moscato's work contains scholarly
editions and translations of his Sermons 11-29 following the same
standards and guidelines explained in the introduction to the first
volume. This volume will be followed by two others with the
remaining sermons and another containing the proceedings of an
international conference on Moscato that was jointly organized by
the Institute of Jewish Studies at Halle-Wittenberg (Germany) and
Mantua's State Archives and held in Mantua (Italy), Judah Moscato's
hometown, in July 2009. The latter volume, while constituting a
useful tool for locating the scholarship of the Mantuan preacher, as
well as providing an analysis of his intellectual environment, is
nevertheless no substitute for a separate volume containing
Moscato's own words, which can be furnished only by publication and
translation of his sermons, a project hopefully to be completed
soon.

The sermons deal with various topics: the social and moral duties
of man toward God, toward his fellow man, and toward himself (sermon
ii); the use of rhetoric for interpreting and teaching of Torah
(sermons 12, 17); the benefit to be derived from learning the Torah
explained in philosophical terms and the method of teaching the
Torah (sermons 13, 19); the relationship between Torah and the sciences (sermon
14); the interpretation of the liturgical feast of Sukkot and the
symbolical meaning of the lulav (sermons 15 and 17); the structure
of the yeshivah according to the pattern of the Sanctuary and of the
world (sermon 16); the attainment of happiness through speculation
and action (sermon i8); the sanctity of Israel on Yom Kippur (sermon
2o); why Israel is to be thankful to God as much as possible in
thought, speech, and action (sermon 21); the power of charity
(sermons 22 and 23); the great responsibility of man in making a vow
to God (sermon 24); the education of children and the importance of
marriage (sermons 25 and 26); the corruption of the virtuous man and
the power of repentance and circumcision (sermon 28 and 29).

Sermon Eleven: What Man Should Do
to Live in This World and in the World to Come

The first part of the sermon is a detailed exegesis of Psalm 15.
Moscato divides the psalm into three main parts, addressing,
respectively, the duty of man toward God, toward his fellow, and
toward himself. All other precepts fall within these three
categories. These precepts can concern matters of seemingly trivial
importance which do not always appear to be wrong; for example,
lending money or paying a judge for his service. However, Scripture
warns against such acts, which can easily degenerate and lead to
sin: lending money can destroy one's wealth if accompanied by the
demand for excessive interest, whereas paying a judge can be
considered bribery and perversion of justice. By means of a diagram
Moscato illustrates the moral teaching of the psalm and the
interrelation between man and God, his fellow, and himself.

The second part of the sermon explains the Ten Commandments in
accordance with the moral teaching of the psalm. For Moscato the
three dimensions of man's relationships—with God, with his fellow,
and with himself—are also included in the Ten Commandments. These
commandments prohibit three principle types of trespasses that are
the cause of all sin: trespasses of thought, speech, and action.

In the last part of the sermon Moscato sums up the parallel
ethical teachings of the psalm and of the Ten Commandments, pointing
out that the Commandments are to be considered mere exhortations, to
be interpreted in analogically, and deducing their deeper meaning
from other passages in Scripture.

At the end of the sermon there is an interesting legal note about
betrothal through stolen money. Following Maimonides and Joseph
Caro, Moscato holds a view that such betrothal is invalid.

Sermon Twelve: Elucidation of the Principles
of the Torah Portion of the Festival of Shavu'ot

The sermon opens with a discussion (13-38) of Midrash Shir ha-Shirim
4:23, where the words of the rabbis on Song of Songs 4:11 are
interpreted as indicating the three essential requirements of one
who expounds the Torah in public, i.e., inventio (20-22), dispositio,
and elocutio. Dispositio and elocutio are inseparable (23-3o).
According to Moscato, these three requirements are each associated
with a single part of Song of Songs 4:11 (31-38).

Thereafter, the second part of the sermon, an allegorical
interpretation of Midrash Shir ha-Shirim 4:11 (39-131), begins.
Moscato first apologizes to those who interpret the revelation at
Mount Sinai as mere allegory (i.e., the Aristotelians), declaring
that they will be disappointed by his words. He also apologizes that
he may be tackling a subject that, for reasons connected to rabbinic
law, should not be discussed on a festival day (39-42). He justifies
his decision by noting that God is indifferent to the passing of
time. Despite this, it is fitting that man celebrate Him according
to the actions the Lord performed on a specific day of the year
(43-47). Therefore, in order to celebrate the first day of the
festival of Shavu'ot, the day when the Lord gave the Torah, Moscato
discusses the wonderful reasons why one should study the Torah
(48-130). To this end, he claims, one must concentrate on the
founding event—the Revelation at Sinai—because a mistake concerning
first principles will affect the conclusions (48-51).

According to Moscato, Midrash Shemot Rabbah 29:9, which
elaborates the idea that all the creatures became silent when God
gave the Torah on Mount Sinai, must be interpreted as an allegory
explaining how the congregation of Israel at Mount Sinai could be
absolutely sure that the voice they heard was of divine origin
(52-55). Indeed, although he does not rule out reading the passage
from Midrash Shemot Rabbah according to its plain meaning (57),
Moscato raises many difficulties inherent in such a reading (52-57).
Through the allegory of the creatures' silence the author of the
Midrash aimed both at assuaging all doubt regarding the historical
and divine truth of the giving of the Torah and at demonstrating
that the voice heard by the children of Israel, whereby the whole
congregation rose to the level of prophets, could only be God's
(58-62).

The silence of the various creatures indeed represents the full
agreement of each part of the congregants' respective souls with the
truth they experienced at Mount Sinai. The birds correspond to the
imagination
(63-65), the oxen to the human intellect (66-67), the Ophanim to the soul (68-69), and the Seraphim to the acquired intellect (7o-75).
The silence of the sea, in turn, is interpreted as representing the
total agreement of human science with the Torah, which encompasses
all of them (76). Another proof that that voice was divine is that
it produced no echo, which means that it could not have been the
result of Moses' own contrivance (8o-82). If it was possible for the
whole congregation of Israel at Mount Sinai to rise to the level of
prophets, in the time to come Israel will enjoy an even greater
comprehension of divine things (83-86). This interpretation of the
Midrash—particularly the claim that the giving of the Torah
represented a prophetic experience for those present—is also
confirmed by Exodus 20:15-17.

(87-94). Now Moscato addresses the question: Why should one study
the Torah? His four reasons coincide with those advanced by
Aristotle in the introduction to his On the Soul intended to awaken
the hearts of his readers to long for wisdom, i.e., the beauty of
the Torah, the profit to be derived from its study, its
extraordinary arrangement, and the loftiness of its teaching
(95-104). Its arrangement, which may sometimes seem puzzling, is
actually wondrous, insofar as it derives from the kabbalistic
mysteries on which the Torah is founded (98-102). The Torah is
distinguished from all other sciences because, if one studies it for
its own sake, one will easily apprehend it (105-107). Another
special reason one should study the Torah is that if one neglects
its study, one is punished accordingly (112-120). Moscato interprets
Psalm 19 as hinting at the reasons why one must study the Torah
(121-130).

Sermon Thirteen:
The Power of Those Who Toil in Torah Study

The sermon "for the Second Day of Shavu'ot" is the continuation
of the topic mentioned at the end of the twelfth sermon: the benefit
to be derived from studying Torah. Moscato adduces logical and
rational arguments in support of the words of the sages (Midrash of
Ruth) to prove that man can achieve his perfection and reach perfect
happiness only through the Torah, and not through philosophical
wisdom. As material food provides nourishment for the body, so the
Torah provides nourishment specific for the intellective soul, which
gets its nourishment, life, and sustenance exclusively from God.

The secular sciences cannot provide suitable nourishment for the
existence and sustenance of the soul, because their objects of inquiry
depend on the things which the soul itself has imagined, the existence
Which is not possible outside the soul. This is the case because the
sciences deal with truths that have been intellectually perceived and
traced from matter both ontologically and categorically. This holds
e even for the natural sciences, whose subject is always changing, I
even for metaphysics and theology, because they are based only the
conjectures of human speculation, which are of a very dubious lure.

The acquired intellect, which is acquired through knowledge of
the fences, is attributed to the specific nature of the human being
who brings his intellect into the light of the Agent Intellect. But,
the sons of Israel benefited from the light of an additional soul
from the superior vine breath, when His lamp shined above their
head.

There follows an explanation of the cognitive process (13-14).
The gent intellect illuminates the forms grasped by man's
imaginative faculty and abstracts its material perceptions, reducing
them to intelligible arms that are recognized by the hylic intellect
in actu. Moscato mentions the different opinions regarding the
nature of this agent intellect. s it separate, as Avicenna posits,
or is it, as Aristotle says, of the same substance as the human
intellect, thereby including the separate faculties of the agent
intellect and the hylic intellect, the latter for receiving
intelligible forms? Moscato concurs with Aristotle (see also
sentence 2).

The philosophical explanation of the cognitive process is applied
by Moscato to the Midrash of Ruth quoted at the beginning of the
sermon. Moscato sees the imaginative faculty, the active-passive
intellect, and the cquired intellect allegorically included in the
sentence of the Midrash. Moscato seeks to prove that man can
comprehend the highest intelligible forms only by means of the
Torah, which allows the human intellect to oar with wings like an
eagle.

The precepts of the Torah have the function of improving the
rational civility of the human intellect by moderating the passions
and reducing human actions to that right middle measure of which
Aristotle speaks in he first book of the Nicomachean Ethics.

Sermon Fourteen:
That Distinguishes between the Holy and the Common

Developing Leviticus 10:10 and Midrash Qohelet Rabbah 1:3,
Moscato seeks to demonstrate that the human sciences are essentially
different from the Torah and cannot apprehend any firm truth so long
as they do not rest on and agree with the Torah (1-6). Unlike the
Torah, they are incapable of perceiving ultimate truth (9); besides,
no matter how long one strives to study the human sciences, one will
never attain perfect knowledge by means of them, while one who
studies the Torah with perfect intention will necessarily attain
truth and joy in accordance with his capabilities (10, 15-16).
Through the Torah God gave intellectual knowledge to the entire
assembly of Israel gathered at Mount Sinai (1112). From then on the
Torah has continued to enlighten Israel, as David testifies in the
Psalms (13-14). All that the Lord requires is that man be attentive
and obey His word, as the episode narrated in i Samuel 15:9-23
demonstrates (17-20).

The vapor mentioned in Psalm 144:4 and the "vapor of vapors"
mentioned in Ecclesiastes 1:2 allude to the sciences and to their
vanity. The seven pots mentioned in Midrash Qohelet Rabbah 1:3
allude to the order according to which the human sciences are to be
studied. Just as the higher it rises, the more rarefied the vapor
rising from the pots becomes, similarly, the higher human knowledge
unaided by the Torah endeavors to reach, the more it fails (24-27).
This is also alluded to in Bekhorot 8b-9a, where it says that if man
relies only on himself, he cannot attain true knowledge (28-33);
rather, true knowledge is to be achieved by means of studying Torah
(34). Yet, if the sciences are understood properly and with the
right intention, there is no contradiction between them and the
Torah, as the Kuzari and other works point out (35-41). As long as
the human sciences do not contradict the Torah, they are useful and
truthful (42).

The covenant between Abraham and Abimelech (Genesis 21:22-33) is
an allusion to the agreement between the Torah and the sciences
(4257). Given this agreement, studying the human sciences benefits
one who intends to study the Torah from a speculative point of view
(58). This is illustrated by Bava Batra 73b, where a bird that
sticks out of the water and whose head reaches heaven represents the
intellectual knowledge of the Torah resting on the knowledge provided by the human sciences,
which is represented by the water (59-69).

Solomon was able to gather all of this knowledge. Indeed, the
seven names by which the wise Solomon was called allude to the seven
sciences which Solomon himself declares void whenever they do not
agree with and are not crowned by the Torah (7o-73). Knowledge of
the sciences alone leads to nothing (74-76). The senses are unable
to attain truth, and even if man manages to hand down the knowledge
he has amassed through tradition, cataclysms are bound to destroy it
(74-85).

The impossibility of formulating any certain statement concerning
reality is also confirmed by the philosopher Heraclitus (86-89).
This is also what Solomon hints at in Ecclesiastes 1:7-8 (9o-91).
And yet, if the Torah is constantly held as the criterion against
which every notion afforded by human knowledge must be measured, the
study of the seven sciences is highly recommendable. This is alluded
to by Solomon in Ecclesiastes 12:10-13 (92-97) and by the prophet
Amos in Amos 7:7-9 (102-106). The happy outcome achieved when
knowledge of the sciences is complemented with knowledge of the
Torah is also alluded to allegorically in `Eruvin 4ob and in Sukkah
53a (107-110). Isaiah also hints at this agreement in Isaiah 3o:26
and in Isaiah 41:17-2o (111-117).

Sermon Fifteen: Man Is a Tree of the Field:3 For Sukkot

The sermon opens with a passage from Bava Batra 75a concerning
the sukkah, which Moscato interprets as alluding to four different
categories of man (3-5). Moscato begins by stating that the
comparison of man to a tree is a common one in the Bible and in the
works of the sages (68). A tree draws its nourishment through its
roots and man is like an upside-down tree where the place of the
roots is taken by the head, which draws nourishment, both materially
(through the mouth) and spiritually (through the brain), and then
carries it to all the other parts of the body, which are compared to
the branches of the tree (9-11). The filaments sprouting from the
roots of a tree are compared to man's hair. Thus, a Nazirite is not
to shave his head, lest he sever his connection to God. Indeed, a
man must spread his `roots' as high as possible in order to cleave
unto the Godhead (12-13).

The fruit of this tree represents man's intellectual knowledge of
the Torah, while the leaves represent his secular knowledge (14-15).
In Genesis 2:8 Eden represents the Supreme Intellect, while the
garden planted in it represents man's intellect (16). Therefore, one
must ensure that he is well rooted in Eden in order to receive the
emanation of the bounteous upper waters; indeed, if one is not, then
he will receive the recompense of the wicked precisely because he is
not rooted deeply enough (17-19)

Moscato then quotes the zoharic interpretation of Deuteronomy
2o:19, according to which the verse is to be interpreted as God
prohibiting Satan from cutting down the trees—i.e., the righteous—of
the community inasmuch as they provide nourishment for the emanation
by means of their prayers (20-27).

Moscato proceeds by examining the four species comprised in the
lulay. These correspond to four species of trees that are
distinguished by being endowed with 1) both taste and fragrance, 2)
taste but not fragrance, 3) fragrance but not taste, 4) neither
taste nor fragrance. Moscato compares these species to the four
categories of man hinted at in the opening quotation, which, as he
points out further on, are distinguished by being endowed with 1)
Torah and good deeds, 2) Torah but not good deeds, 3) good deeds but
not Torah, 4) neither Torah nor good deeds (28-31 et infra).

The water libation prescribed for the festival of Tabernacles—a
halakhah which was given to Moses at Sinai and which is also hinted
at in the Scriptures (39-40)—alludes to the divine emanation which
makes man's intellect blossom and which is welcomed with great
rejoicing, as is also pointed out in Babylonian Talmud, Rosh ha-Shanah
16a and in Psalms 68:10 (32-38). The four gardens within Eden allude
to the four different kinds of emanation which flow on the four
different categories of men (41-45). The structure of the sukkah
reproduces the analogies between man and tree (47-48).

Moscato then gives an interpretation of Leviticus 23:43 according
to which the tabernacles also represent a sign of divine protection
(49). As for the other precepts related to the festival, the
thirteen oxen sacrificed on the first day of the feast symbolize the
age of thirteen, when a boy becomes responsible for his actions; and
the seventy oxen to be sacrificed throughout the whole feast
represent the seventy years of a man's life (5o). Moreover, by
leaving one's house and entering the sukkah one symbolically exposes
oneself to the blessing of divine watering represented by rain (51).
Here Moscato further elaborates on the nature and benefits of divine watering and the process whereby it spreads throughout
man's body (52-55).

The ultimate goal of this man-tree is to unify with the Tree of
Life, i.e., the Lord; and this is the reason why in the Midrash the
four species comprised in the lulav symbolize both the four
categories of men and the Lord himself (55-6o). Each man cleaves
unto the Lord in accordance with his capabilities and each can
attain some degree of felicity (61). The structure of the tabernacle
alludes to the four different categories of men (62). The Leviathan
mentioned in the opening passage from the Talmud alludes to the
Torah; its skin symbolizes the skins on which the Torah is written
(63-66). Moscato interprets Isaiah 44:1-5 as alluding to the four
categories of men corresponding to the four kinds of trees, and to
the four kinds of watering peculiar to each of them (67-7o).

Sermon Sixteen: A Song at the Dedication
of the House and a Testimony for the Wise

The Sanctuary Moses built was shaped according to the threefold
structure of creation. The idea of the yeshivah, whose edification
is celebrated in this sermon, follows the same pattern (3-4). Yet,
after the destruction of the Second Temple one must turn one's very
soul (which is also threefold insofar as it is divided into soul,
spirit, and intellective soul, which in turn correspond to the three
parts into which man's body is divided) into a perfect, unblemished
sanctuary.

The words of Exodus 25:9 we-khen ta`asu ("Even so shall ye make
it") refer precisely to this sanctuary-soul (5-7). This is all the
more true of the members of a yeshivah, whose activity must be
countersigned by a thorough respect for halakhic laws (8-9). The
yeshivah, perfect men, and Israel all descend from the five primeval
possessions of the Lord: the Torah, the Sanctuary, heaven and earth,
Abraham, and Israel, the last of which is composed of the priests,
the Levites, and the people of Israel (1o). Therefore, in order to
preserve the purity of the yeshivah, its head must be of fitting
lineage, for otherwise the whole enterprise will be spoiled (12-14).
Yet, thanks to the help of the Lord a fitting candidate has been
found and appointed as head of the yeshivah (15).

Moscato then declares that only his proximity to the leaders of
the yeshivah will enable him to proceed in his discourse, for, as
pointed out by the Talmud and by Socrates in his Theages, the closer
one draws to the sages, the more he learns and understands (16-2o).
The aim of this yeshivah is to provide each with the kind of
learning that best befits him in order for him to attain truth, to
teach the precepts in order to fulfill them, and to act justly in
order that one may fear the Lord. These aims are best summarized in
Psalm 19:8-10 (21-23).

Moscato then interprets Psalm 133 as a description and a tribute
for a yeshivah (25-29). He then adds a word of praise for dialogue
and confrontation as a means of learning (3o-31) and an
interpretation of Deuteronomy 29:9 as alluding to the three
hierarchical rungs into which the faculty of a yeshivah is
subdivided (32-33). Moscato proceeds to explain why the issue of the
appointment of the yeshivah faculty is analyzed in the talmudic
treatise Qiddushin, whose title alludes to the unbreakable
`marriage' between the Lord and Israel. This entails that Israel is
the Lord's own possession, as pointed out not only by the Mishnah,
but also in Song of Songs 1:13-15 (34-36), and that Israel cannot
become alienated from God (37-38). The sermon ends with a
philosophical interpretation of Psalm 23 presented as the head of
the yeshivah—i.e., Moscato himself—entreating the Lord to pour
intellectual knowledge unto him and from him down to the other
members of the academy (40-45).

Sermon Seventeen: A Tree Bearing Fruit:[A Sermon] for the Festival of Sukkot

Moscato expounds the three descriptions of the healing properties
attributed by the rabbis (Midrash Shir ha-Shirim Rabbah 4:25) to the
leaf of the trees spoken of in Ezekiel 47:12. According to Moscato
these refer to the three basic skills a rhetorician must
exhibit—delivery (particularly, mime), elocution, and invention
(4-1o). These skills are also alluded to in Isaiah 54:1 (11).

Furthermore, all rhetorical skills are alluded to by the four
species comprised in the lulav. The citrus alludes to disposition
and memory, the palm branch and myrtle to delivery and mime, and the
willow branch to elocution (12-14) Yet, human perfection does not
hinge on one's rhetorical skills, but on one's acting for the sake of the Lord
(15-17). God can be compared to the number `one' and to the
geometrical figure of the point; angels to the line; the celestial
spheres to the surface, and the lower world to the solid (18-19).
This set of analogies is hinted at by the Aramaic word for `world'—
r —each of whose three letters allude to one of the three dimensions
of a solid body (2o). By reciting the Trisagion the angels mean to
declare God's exceptionalness beyond the three dimensions that
characterize His creation (21-23).

The four species comprised in the lulav allude to God and the
three dimensions (24-27). Moscato then traces a parallel among the
four species comprised in the lulav and the four faculties of man:
the vegetative faculty (willow branch), the sensitive faculty
(myrtle), the motional faculty (palm branch), and the intellectual
faculty (citrus) (28-31). It is because of its connection with the
only immortal part of the soul (namely, the intellectual faculty)
that the citrus is not bound together with the other species
comprised in the lulav (32). Similarly, the place assigned to all
the other species depends on their correspondence to the various
parts of creation (33-34)• The perfection that must characterize
each of the elements comprising the lulav thus alludes to man's
obligation to mend all his own faculties (35). Moscato expands on
the set of analogies drawn by stating that the four faculties of man
find their respective counterparts in the four rivers coming out of
the garden of Eden (36), and that among the four kinds of composite
bodies, the inanimate, the vegetal, and the living ones, correspond
respectively to the three worlds (from the lower one to the angelic
one), while the speaking bodies correspond to God (37-38).

The four species comprised in the lulav therefore correspond to
man's four faculties and the four realms of existence (39). Man must
improve each of his own faculties through fitting means (40-43). A
man who has control of his passions can be compared to a cube (43)
and to the center of a circle (44). Moscato interprets Psalm 131 to
be David's narration of the fight which he victoriously waged
against his own passions (45-48). Man sins with four parts of his
body: his heart (i.e., his mind), his eyes (the seat of craving),
his mouth, and his limbs (49). David alludes to these four sections
of the body in Psalm 36 (5o) and also to the correct use of these
parts of the body in Psalm 119 (51). Further, Mishnah Avot 5:2o and
Psalm 131 can be interpreted accordingly (52-53). The elevation of
the lulav therefore symbolizes man's elevating himself by
subjugating his passions (54)•

Sermon Eighteen: For Shavu'ot:
A Bell of Gold and Its Clapper Is of Pearl

The Torah includes both a speculative and a practical component.
The topic of this sermon deals with the question of whether
speculation alone, action alone, or both together are necessary for
attaining happiness. Moscato personifies the three options as
protagonists arguing against each other in a debate.

The first protagonist argues that it is meet that our perfection
pertain to that specific part of the human being which distinguishes
him from the other animals, i.e., the intellect. Thus man's
perfection involves actualizing his potential for knowing universal
and eternal things. Accordingly, speculation alone is necessary for
human perfection, whereas action is not remarkable, but merely
useful because it is like a ladder to speculation, by preparing the
material part of the soul for receiving the intellectual emanation
which is its substance.

The second protagonist claims that the principle of human
perfection depends on and consists in action alone. He argues that
the principle of man's perfection pertains to that specific part of
his nature which makes him different from the other, superior,
intellectual beings. It is undeniable that this difference cannot
come from intellectual speculation, because the superior beings are
also intelligent, indeed even more so than we are. Accordingly, it
follows that the practical intellect which distinguishes us from
both the superior and inferior beings is the principle of our
perfection.

The third protagonist holds that both speculation and action are
equivalent and in themselves aim at the principle of man's
perfection and happiness, because man, in his wondrous composition,
consists of two parts: intellect and matter. For this reason the
ancient sages called man the link between the superior and inferior
beings and the horizon between the material and the immaterial
beings. Thus it is proper for man to become perfect in his two
components. Indeed, through speculation he can assimilate to the
superior beings, improving his intellect; through action he can
amend the low matter; and both together can improve his nature. If
one of these two parts is deficient, he cannot achieve true
perfection, and he therefore fails in his mission. For God sent man
to preserve the life of all the parts of which he is composed.
Moscato shares this view and confutes the theses of the former two protagonists by
means of philosophical considerations drawn principally from
Maimonides, Joseph Albo, and Judah Halevi, which he combines with
quotations from the Bible, the Zohar, and the Talmud.

Sermon Nineteen: For Signs and for Seasons (Mo`adim)

According to Isaac ben Moses Arama, there are seven basic and
unique teachings of the Torah, the knowledge of which coincides with
the knowledge of the Torah. They are: 1) God created the world ex
nihilo; 2) God is omnipotent; 3) prophecy and the Torah are of
divine origin; 4) God forgives one who repents; 5) God watches over
and provides for Israel; 6) man's actions shall meet with divine
reward or punishment; and 7) Israel will live in the world to come
(1-2).

God has connected each of the seven principal Jewish festivals
(the Sabbath, Passover, Sukkot, Rosh ha-Shanah, Yom Kippur, Shavu'ot,
and Shemini `Aseret) with these teachings in order to render them
comprehensible to all (3-4). In order to support the analogies Arama
made, Moscato points out that the seven principles of the Torah are
hinted at in the seven biblical verses that begin with the Hebrew
word luie (except, unless, were it not') (5-1o).

Genesis 31:42 teaches that God created the world ex nihilo
(11-12); Deuteronomy 32:27 teaches that God is omnipotent (13);
Isaiah 1:9 teaches that God forgives one who repents (14); Psalm
124:2 teaches that God watches over and provides for Israel (15);
Psalm 94:17 teaches that man's actions shall meet with divine reward
or punishment (16-18); Psalm 27:13 teaches that Israel will live in
the world to come (20-23); Psalm 119:92 teaches the divine origin of
prophecy and the Torah (24).

Yet, why does the word Jule enjoy the privilege of marking the
principles of the Torah? The truth of all but one of the principles
of the Torah is demonstrated by experience (which is achieved
through logical analysis of the events of one's life); only the
existence of the world to come rests solely on faith (25). Now,
because, as the rabbis point out, the unusual spelling of luie in
Psalm 27:13 alludes to David's doubt as to whether he would merit
the world to come—a doubt he could only overcome through faith—the
word luie suitably alludes to faith (26-27). On the other hand, the
word luie is also appropriate for alluding to experience because it
means `had not' in all the verses Moscato mentioned. Thus it is used
to introduce propositions that begin: `Had x not happened, y would
have ensued'—and yet, since things have gone differently, one is to
conclude that the providence of God determined otherwise (28-31).

More generally, God's provision for Israel is demonstrated by the people's survival through adversity, as the rabbis and
Nachmanides have pointed out (32-33). This also explains Psalm 11:1
and why the plots of evil-doers have no chance of success (34-35).
In the last part of the sermon, Moscato applies his reasoning to
Psalm 11, which he interprets as a demonstration of the existence of
divine providence (36-52).

Sermon Twenty: Holy Convocation. For Yom Kippur

The main topic of the sermon is the sanctity of Israel on Yom
Kippur. In Pirqe de-Rabbi Eli`ezer it says that Sammael or Satan,
who acts as accuser before God, has power over Israel only on Yom
Kippur. However, in other rabbinic writings (Wayyiqra Rabbah and
Babylonian Talmud Yoma) it is stated that "during all the days of
the year Satan has permission to bring accusations against Israel,
but he does not bring any accusations on Yom Kippur" For Moscato the
contradiction is only apparent. God gave Sammael permission to bring
charges again Israel on Yom Kippur because He wanted to confound
Sammael for Israel's benefit the rest of the days of the year.

Furthermore, other questions are discussed which the passage from
Pirqe de-Rabbi Eli`ezer raises: What is the relationship between
Israel and the angels? What is the real order and necessary division
of the five comparisons mentioned in Pirqe de-Rabbi Eli`ezer?
Moscato addresses these questions by allegorically interpreting
several quotations from Scripture and the Talmud which, in his
opinion, prove the superiority of Israel to the angels in heaven.
Indeed, Israel on Yom Kippur, though on earth, can free itself of
its material nature. Therefore, even Sammael on Yom Kippur is
obliged to acknowledge the sanctity of Israel.

Now, if even the Accuser cannot find a reason to bring charges
against Israel on Yom Kippur, what is the function of the preacher
who addresses words of rebuke to the assembly in the synagogue on
this day? The rebuke of the preacher is like a preventive cure aimed
at strengthening the moral health of the community. The preacher
prevents the member of the community from sinning after Yom Kippur has passed and
from dirtying his soul, which is like a precious vessel that belongs
exclusively to God.

Sermon Twenty-One: It Is Good to Take Refuge
in the Lord' and to Render Thank-Offerings unto Him

The people of Israel are to be thankful to God as much as
possible in thought, speech, and action since God blessed them with
His wisdom, might, and abundance in Egypt. These three make up all
the good qualities which emanate from Him, blessed be He, upon us in
soul, body, and wealth.

Israel's thankfulness is strictly linked to hope. The people of
Israel are to trust in the Lord and not despair over the length of
their exile. Moscato explains the rabbinic passage from Midrash
Tanhuma quoted in the Yalqut Shim'oni accordingly and uses it as the
outline of this sermon's argument.

Among the three categories of thought, speech, and action with
which the people of Israel are to show their gratefulness, action is
the most important. But if action is hindered, it is right and
proper that thought and speech replace it.

Gratefulness is a quality that, despite their nature, even
animals without intelligence proudly exhibit. Moscato quotes some
examples of gratefulness among animals (35-38). If even animals are
grateful, all the more should man be grateful toward God, Who truly
does good. One should be generous in repaying God for His goodness
in accordance with one's capacity. But one should keep in mind that
the hand of one who repays or is grateful falls short in comparison
to all His bountiful dealings. Fulfilling the precepts is a fitting
way to repay Him because the precepts come from the divine world for
our good; it is best to fulfill them well and at the right time. As
an example of the fulfillment of the precepts at the right time
Moscato mentions the redemption of captives, which is best suited
for the time when the Holy One, blessed be He, was concerned with
Israel's redemption from Egypt, i.e., around Passover time. This
topic is discussed more extensively in Sermon 23.

Explaining the passage from Midrash Tanhuma, Moscato digresses to
discuss the meaning of the word az. He repeats the explanation that
he gave in the Sermon 14: az, whose numeric value is eight, alludes
to the seven human sciences, which are also alluded to by the seven
days of creation, and to the divine Torah, also alluded to by the
covenant of circumcision, which is the principle of the Jewish
faith.

The sermon ends with several biblical quotations which strengthen
Israel's trust in God and their hope in the future redemption from
exile.

Sermon Twenty-Two: For Your Poor in Your Land

The sermon deals with the importance of giving alms to the poor
of Israel. The Jews in the Diaspora are obligated to support their
brothers in the Land of Israel with their charity in order to
increase the study of Torah and the performance of the precepts in
the original land of their observance. The Jews living in the
Diaspora thereby acquire many great and true advocates before the
Lord. Through charity man acquires merit great enough to outweigh
all his sins.

Moscato quotes several writings from the Bible, Midrashim, and
rabbinic authors (Rashi, Judah Halevi, Bahya ben Joseph ibn Paquda,
and Maimonides) that assert the great atoning power of charity. For
one who performs charity causes many other people to be righteous.
Further, the more the number of those who devote themselves to the
Torah and its precepts in the original place of their observance
grows, the more the merit of those who sustain them with their alms
increases and spreads. As in the case of the statute of the
ma'amadot at the time of the Temple, the righteous who engage in
performing a precept in God's Land also act on behalf of those who
support them.

Furthermore Moscato stresses that the blessing that God gives men
in riches and wealth is like a loan that the Lord grants to man on
condition that he favor the poor. Man repays his debt by giving to
the indigent. However, although a borrower usually pays interest to
a lender, this is not the case with the Holy One, blessed is He: on
the contrary, He rewards the borrower with interest when he pays off
his debt.

Moscato concludes the sermon by pointing out that charity should
be done only with the right intention, for the sake of Heaven,
without the intention of receiving profit or admiration for generous
acts.

Sermon Twenty-Three: Liberty to the Captives:
Parashah Saw, on Shabbat ha-Gadol before Passover

Moscato deals with the topic of ransoming captives, which is
connected with the subject of the previous sermon (22): the
importance of charity. This sermon is dedicated to the feast of
Shabbat ha-Gadol which precedes Passover and commemorates the loth
of Nisan, when the Hebrew slaves took the lambs for Pesach and kept
them outside their homes until they sacrificed them on the 14th of
Nisan (Exodus 12:3-6).

For Moscato, ransoming captives is one of the greatest
manifestations of charity, superior even to sacrifices. Israelis
urged to perform this act of charity on Shabbat ha-Gadol, which is
the day of the redemption of their souls and the beginning of their
performance of the precepts, as Abu-darham wrote at the end of
Tefillot shel Purim. Throughout the sermon, Moscato compares
charity, especially the act of ransoming captives, to the
sacrificial offering in the Sanctuary.

He gives four necessary conditions for a perfect donation to God.
The first condition requires that the soul of one who gives an
offering be pure in its intention; the second condition is that the
offering be proportionate to the means of the donor: "the wealthy
man through his ox and the poor man through his sheep"; the third
condition is that man be quick [to give] in every manner; the fourth
condition demands that he give his offering with joy.

Charity given under these four conditions causes God to change
His judgment into mercy and will accelerate Israel's redemption.

Sermon Twenty-Four: Pay Thy Vows unto the Most High"

The subject of Sermon 24 follows that of the previous sermon and
contcerns delaying payment of a vow or a promised donation to God.
With the support of several quotations from the Bible and rabbinic
authors, Moscato stresses the gravity of the trespass that one
commits when he delays payment of his vow.

God will seek the vow from the one who makes it through many
admonishing signs and messengers in the form of several kinds of
divine punishment, afflictions, and illnesses. These are not to be
understood as indications of divine vengeance, but rather as a means
used by God to keep man from iniquity and to cleanse him of great
transgression.

Moscato proves the gravity of the sin of one who thinks that it
is right to vow, or even that such vowing is for the honor of God,
when he knows he cannot fulfill his vow. A person who does not keep
his word depreciates the value of speech, which is what
distinguishes man from all other animals. Furthermore, delaying the
fulfillment of a vow leads to the perversion of man's three
essential components: nefesh, ruah, and neshamah, relating,
respectively, to the vegetative, the sensitive, and the intellective
faculty, as illustrated by Jacob in the Bible. Moscato concludes the
sermon by showing that those who do not delay in paying their vows
bring the benefit of material and spiritual happiness to themselves
and to all people in this world and in the world to come.

Sermon Twenty-Five: The Father to
the Children Shall Make Known the Way of Their Perfection

The main topic of the sermon is the education of children.
Moscato gives an allegorical explanation of Psalm 127, saying that
children are like arrows that are to be shot toward the target of
perfection. Perfection includes the perfection of man's relationship
with God, with himself, and with his fellow. Only in this way can a
well-ordered social life be maintained. Man can reach the perfection
he aims for only if God helps him and sends wisdom, understanding,
and magnanimity, as He did with King Solomon, the best example of a
perfect man.

God gave His holy Torah to His people in order to help them
attain the perfection that leads to happiness. By means of the
Torah, which young people learn from youth on, the people of Israel
will spread their wings upward and cleave to the heavenly creatures,
as Isaac Abrabanel wrote. Moscato sees an allusion to this in the
Cherubim that spread their wings over the Ark. On the way to
perfection man is to achieve control over his material faculties,
which are prone to serve the evil inclination. If children learn to
cleave to God and His Torah, they will be able to rule over their
material faculties and make right use of them.

Moscato develops the metaphor of the bow and arrow for children's
education, playing with a pun on the words yarah ("to shoot") and
yareh ("to show"). He interprets 1 Samuel 31:3 accordingly. Moscato
explains that the word `teaching' (hora'ah) looks like a form of
yarah because the teacher (moreh) is one who turns and directs the
pupil toward the targeted knowledge, like one who shoots (moreh) an
arrow in order to reach the target placed straight ahead before him.

Sermon Twenty-Six:
Whoso Findeth a Wife Findeth a Great Good

"Any man who has no wife lives without joy, without blessing, and
without goodness", says R. Hanilai in Babylonian Talmud Yevamot 62b.
The opposite of this statement, namely "that any man who finds a
wife lives with joy, blessing, and goodness" is true only if a man
marries a suitable woman. According to Moscato, marriage is a
commandment which God gave human beings when he paired Adam and Eve.
Man and woman should form a perfect unity, which is necessary for
attaining felicity and bliss in this world and the next. Only a man
who is married is really a `man', otherwise he remains like a little
child, as the author of Toldot Yishaq explained on the basis of
Scriptural references (27-28). When a husband and wife are worthy,
the Divine Presence abides with them; but when they are not worthy
fire consumes them. As Moscato explains, the words ish `man' and
ishah `woman' are connected with the word esh `fire.

If a man marries a woman that is suitable for him, he will
benefit both intellectually and practically. Moscato interprets
Psalm 128 accordingly and this exegesis makes up the central part of
the sermon. The main goal of marriage is not to preserve the
species, which is also common to animals, nor is it beauty or other
similar things which are considered important by the many. For a
pious Jew, the main purpose of marriage is to have worthy children
who gladden the hearts of God and men by performing God's Law.

In order to marry a suitable woman, man has to inquire about her
family. This is his duty. He should do all that he can to marry a
woman suitable for him. However, in spite of all his efforts, only
God can help him have a blissful marriage. As Scripture says, but a
prudent wife is from the Lord.

Sermon Twenty-Seven:
The Punishment of the Perfect Man When He Backslides

The topic of this sermon is the gravity of the corruption of the
virtuous. The sermon is introduced only by a quotation from the
Talmud (ma'amar) without any explicit reference to the Bible
(nose'). For two reasons the corruption of the upright man who has
attained a high level in wisdom is particularly grave and
displeasing to God: the conscious rebellion against the precepts of
God and the damage to the precious vessel, namely the soul, which is
the exclusive property of God. The latter was mentioned in Sermon 20
(42-43).

Here, in Sermon 27, Moscato gives a broader treatment of this
subject, relying upon the Talmudic principle that a craftsman does
not acquire title to the increase in value caused by the
construction of an article which is the exclusive property of its
owner. Moscato interprets this principle metaphorically: the article
is the soul and its owner is God, who furnished man with all means
necessary for improving his soul. If man damages his soul after he
has attained its perfection, he is liable to God for full
compensation for the damage. The value of his soul is so great and
he bears so much guilt that there is no remedy." The evil
inclination which is congenital to the human soul leads man to sin.
Man follows his evil inclination and, because of the deficiency of
his understanding, loses the perfection of soul he had attained. For
a human being does not know his value and does not understand the
place of his dignity. Thus he exchanges a good for a bad.

Moscato seems to accept the intellectual explanation of vice
according to Aristotelian philosophy. However, Aristotle is not
quoted. Moscato supports his interpretation with several Biblical
quotations from the psalms (25). Through his own willpower alone,
man cannot resist the evil inclination of his nature and keep the
perfection he has attained. To be sure, even the angels changed
their mind and degraded themselves; consequently their evil inclination led to their expulsion from
heaven to earth (42). Man can only prevail over his evil inclination
with God's help, using the Torah He gave him as an antidote.

Moscato concludes with an exhortation to trust in the mercy of
God, Who will restore Israel's virtue to its original condition,
thanks also to the merit of Moses.

Sermon Twenty-Eight: Circumcision of Body and Heart

The sermon opens by quoting Deuteronomy 3o:6 from Parashah
Nisavim, which lays out the theme of the sermon: the importance of
repentance and of circumcision, which establishes the Israelites'
sacred covenant with God.

Because of the sin of the First Man, the human soul lost its
original purity and remains imprisoned in matter. However, God
devised repentance as an aid for man to return to Him and to restore
the innocence of his soul, so that it can rise to God with its three
faculties: namely, the vegetative, sensitive, and intellective
faculties. Another positive consequence of repentance is to give one
who sins the certainty of being able to atone, so that he does not
abandon himself to committing other, greater transgressions because
he despairs of ever being forgiven.

In the time of the Temple sacrifices served as expiation. As they
were commensurate with the gravity of the sin, they made sinners
understand the degree to which they had trespassed the law (17-23).
However, true atonement could only be attained, even in that time,
through perfection of the soul itself "through acting justly, loving
kindness, and walking humbly with one's God" (22). Now that the
Temple no longer exists, atonement is attained through repentance,
which includes confession of sin before God (24-29).

Moscato proceeds to interpret Psalm 118, which is included in the
hallel prayer, as saying that a repentant sinner opens the gate to
God's mercy and can live (37-48). God's love is greater than man's
weakness. God decreed that even for an intentional sin, in every
place and at any time, even without making an offering, it is enough
for a sinner to repent, to confess his guilt and he will be forgiven
(49). Therefore, man should thank and praise God for His mercy
(50-53).

Sentences 54-93 are a detailed explanation of eight questions
regarding the meaning of Parashah Nisavim. A central subject among
them is the connection of circumcision to repentance. Moscato points
out the difference between the First Man's circumcision and the
second circumcision, which God promised to His people after their
exile in Egypt and before they came into the Holy Land (Deuteronomy
3o:6).

Moscato stresses the importance of circumcision of the heart. The
First Man (Adam) received both circumcisions, that of body and of
heart, in his perfect and pure condition, when he was shaped by God.
After his transgression, his circumcision turned into an irrevocable
death sentence despite his repentance (78). The second circumcision
is, however, a peaceful means which God devised in order to repair
man's matter and evil inclination. It is a useful improvement for
restoring the perfection of the heart to its original condition
before Adam's sin. With God's help, this correction will be more
perfect and certain and will protect man from the danger of falling
again from the level of perfection he has attained.

At the end of the sermon (115-134) Moscato explains the
allegorical meaning of the rite of the circumcision which is
considered analogous to the sacrifice in the Temple.

Finally, this sermon was composed for the circumcision of one of
Moscato's grandsons, in which Moscato himself participated as one of
the two godfathers.

Sermon Twenty-Nine: Covenant of Peace

The topic of the importance of circumcision for improving man's
body and soul, a topic which Moscato treated in the previous sermon,
is further expanded in this one. Circumcision is called a "covenant
of peace" because it brings abundant peace into man and because it
is a precept of God, who is called "the King to whom peace belongs".
Abraham is the exemplary figure who accepted circumcision as a
precept of God and as a sign of His covenant. But how could Abraham
be called "perfect" on account of his circumcision alone, while the
children of Israel must observe the entire Torah to attain
perfection? Further, how could circumcision counterbalance all the
precepts of the Torah? Finally, what is the relationship between
circumcision and the Torah if heaven and earth exist through each?

Moscato explains these questions by analogy with the movement of
the heavenly spheres. Abraham is likened to the eighth sphere of the
fixed stars which is nearest to the Mover and consequently attains
its perfection through a single movement, whereas the other, lower
spheres attain their perfection through a number of movements.
Similarly, because Abraham was very close to God, it was sufficient
for him to perform the precept of circumcision alone, in addition to
the other seven precepts which were given to the sons of Noah, in
order to attain moral perfection (22-52).

Regarding the relationship between the Torah and circumcision,
Moscato agrees with Abraham Shalom, the author of Neweh Shalom, that
the covenant of the Torah cannot be distinguished from the covenant
of circumcision because each of them brings benefit to body and
soul, only that the first is general and the second particular.

Finally, Moscato answers the third question, namely that dealing
with the equivalence of circumcision to all the precepts of the
Torah. The statement that circumcision counterbalances all the
precepts should not be understood literally. Rather, it means that
circumcision readies the child on whom the ritual is performed to
fulfill all the precepts of the Torah effectively. Man should strive
to improve himself even though he cannot succeed without the aid of
God.

At the end of the sermon Moscato mentions the grandson on the
occasion of whose circumcision the sermon was written.

Jews and Magic in Medici Florence: The Secret World of Benedetto
Blanis by Edward L. Goldberg (Toronto Italian Studies: University of Toronto
Press) In the seventeenth century, Florence was the wealthy capital of
the Medici Grand Dukedom of Tuscany. But amid all the affluence
splendour, the Jews in its tiny Ghetto struggled to earn a living by
any possible means, including loan-sharking and rag-picking. They
were often regarded as a mysterious people gifted with rare
supernatural powers. From their ranks arose Benedetto Blanis, a
businessman and aspiring scholar from a distinguished Ghetto dynasty
who sought to parlay his alleged mastery of astrology, alchemy, and
Kabbalah into a grand position at the Medici Court. He gradually won
the patronage of Don Giovanni dei Medici, a scion of the ruling
family, and for six tumultuous years their lives were inextricably
linked.

Drawing onthousands of newly uncovered documents from the Medici Granducal Archive, Edward Goldberg reveals the daily dramas behind
the scenes in the Pitti Palace and in the narrow byways of the
Florentine Ghetto. He shows that truth - particularly historical
truth - can be stranger than fiction, especially as witnessed by the
people most immediately involved.

Cities are defined as much by what is missing as by what is
present. Two thousand years ago in this very place there was the
forum of the Roman colony of Florentia. Then, from the Middle Ages
until nearly the present day, the Mercato Vecchio, Florence's
central market. And on the edge of this market, the Jewish Ghetto,
as decreed by the Medici grand dukes of
Tuscany.

Scant traces of the Roman forum remain below ground. The central
market has since moved twice - first to nearby San Lorenzo and then
to distant Novoli. The Jewish Ghetto ceased to exist as a physical
place more than a hundred years ago, when its buildings were razed
in the late nineteenth century. It survives, however, as an
historical fact and perhaps even as a state of mind.

Rather than brick and stone, the primary evidence for the
Florentine Ghetto now consists of words on paper, preserved for
centuries in local archives - usually Christian archives, not those
of the Jews themselves. For years, the leaders of the Jewish
community periodically obliterated their own history, clearing out
the old documents on their shelves to make space for new ones. If we
want to discover the Ghetto as it was and trace the lives of its
inhabitants, the place to begin is the vast Medici Granducal Archive
with its police files, judicial records, legal contracts, government
deliberations, and literally millions of letters.

Sometimes there is an extraordinary trove waiting to be found -
words on paper that seem to cancel the intervening centuries and
bring us face to face with the past. Between 1615 and 1620 Benedetto
Blanis (c.1580-c.1647), a Jewish scholar and businessman in the
Florentine Ghetto, sent 196 letters to Don Giovanni dei Medici
(1567-1621), an influential member of the ruling family. In the
Medici Granducal Archive, we can read these letters more or less as
Benedetto wrote them - in pen and ink, with all of the peculiarities
of their time. Now we can also read them in print, in a full
critical edition - with transcriptions, footnotes, and indices?

Here, in Jews and Magic in Medici Florence, we follow this same
man on another archival journey - one that is longer, less direct,
and less clearly mapped. It takes us to the farthest reaches of the
Medici Gran-ducal Archive and then beyond, moving from document to
document of every imaginable kind. Benedetto served Don Giovanni as
librarian - managing his palace library, organizing and cataloguing
its contents, acquiring books from various sources, and sharing his
patron's most recondite interests. Together they ventured into
dangerous and often forbidden territory: astrology, alchemy, and the
Kabbalah.

Along the way, we see Benedetto Blanis living life on the edge,
in a strange no man's land between the Ghetto and the Medici Court.
He was a scholar by choice but a businessman by necessity and his
commercial ventures, especially loan sharking and debt collection,
made him many enemies. Benedetto's worst foes were other Jews and
the very worst his own in-laws and cousins - recent converts to
Catholicism.

Benedetto played a daring game of brinksmanship in the realm of
the occult, trusting in his patron's power and influence to set
things right. He traded in esoteric writings, especially works on
the Inquisition's Index of Prohibited Books, and he was incarcerated
twice, first for two weeks and then for several years. After one
particularly stormy encounter with Monsignor Cornelio Priatoni, the
Father Inquisitor in Florence, Benedetto Blanis reported to Don
Giovanni dei Medici: 'I was a bad Jew, he said, because I went from
one condition to another and did not stay Jewish. That, he said, was
his definition of a bad Jew.'

Benedetto may have been a good Jew or he may have been a bad one,
but he was undeniably a brilliant and provocative individual. Thanks
to his personal letters and a host of other documents in the Medici
Granducal Archive, we can follow him closely, day by day, as he
struggled to make a life for himself against daunting odds.

Preachers of the Italian Ghetto edited by David B. Ruderman.
(University of California Press) By the mid-sixteenth century, Jews
in the cities of Italy were being crowded into compulsory ghettos as
a result of the oppressive policies of Pope Paul IV and his
successors. The sermons of Jewish preachers during this period
provide a remarkable vantage point from which to view the early
modern Jewish social and cultural landscape. In this eloquent
collection, six leading scholars of Italian Jewish history reveal
the important role of these preachers: men who served as a bridge
between the ghetto and the Christian world outside, between old and
new conventions, and between elite and popular modes of thought. The
story of how they reflected and shaped the culture of their
listeners, who felt the pressure of cramped urban life as well as of
political, economic, and religious persecution, is finally beginning
to be told. Through the words of the Italian ghetto preachers, we
discover a richly textured panorama of Jewish life more than 400
years ago.

The sixteenth century witnessed the
ghettoization of Jews in Italy. Although the process was accompanied
by compulsory sermons from Christian preachers, Jews flocked to hear
Jewish preachers, whose sermons drew on both Judaism and the regnant
cultural tastes. Preachers of the Italian Ghetto offers six
eminently readable essays and a methodological overview, which
together form an important first approach to this valuable
literature.

Marc Saperstein's essay, "Italian Jewish Preaching: An Overview,"
lives up to its title. He considers the intriguing problem of the
relation between a sermon as delivered and its later published form.
He also examines the role of the preacher as moral critic for his
audience and the "serious gap between the values of the community
and those of its religious leadership" (32). His remarks parallel
those of David Ruderman in the introduction, where he discusses the
bifurcated role of sermons in both relaying cultural patterns found
throughout Europe and in communicating "a cultural ambience unique
to Jews" (3).

The issue of Christian influences and ideas in Jewish sermons
surfaces in a number of the essays. Moshe Idel examines Judah
Moscato's interest in kabbalah and his appropriation of motifs and
ideas from the Christian environment of Mantua. It was the kabbalah,
of interest to Christian neoplatonists as well as Jews, that "became
the main avenue of intellectual acculturation into the outside
world" (57). But in the next essay, "Preaching as Mediation Between
Elite and Popular Cultures: The Case of Judah del Bene," Robert
Bonfil proposes that the preacher served as a mediator between elite
and popular culture. He finds that the baroque obscurity of someone
like del Bene served only to fix and widen the gap between the
literate and the illiterate. The baroque Jewish culture of the
seventeenth century thus emerges as a sharp break with, not a
continuation of, earlier Renaissance-era Jewish culture. Preachers
like del Bene and Azariah Figo were surely, Ruderman claims,
repudiating attempts like those of Moscato to harmonize Judaism with
alien thought. Ruderman finds that Figo arrived at a kind of
skepticism spreading among Jews and gentiles alike, akin to that of
Mersenne and Gassendi. Joanna Weinberg's essay on Leon Modena, a
Venetian preacher, demonstrates how he relied on the rhetorical
models developed by Christian preachers, especially Francesco
Panigarola. These models allowed Modena to locate a middle ground
between the mannered style of Moscato and the simpler language of
the majority of rabbis. Weinberg thus asserts that Modena was
conscious of the preacher's responsibility to his audience. The
volume concludes with a largely descriptive piece, Elliot Horowitz's
"Speaking of the Dead: The Emergence of the Eulogy among Italian
Jewry of the Sixteenth Century."

This field of research is still in its infancy, and it is
to be hoped that further work will be done. If nothing else, more
systematic attention is needed to the problem of reading a literary
genre so dense with references and allusions as sermons. Nor have
these essays, which all take an approach more or less along the
lines of intellectual history, produced much insight into the social
world of the ghetto. The consistent high quality of these
contributions, however, insures that they will serve as guideposts
to this important field of research for a long time.